1. At the moment in Libya continues a veritable civil war. Against the rebellious people are using warplanes and helicopters. The number of fatalities in the hundreds. In turn, the demonstrators were armed and well tuned at least strongly.
2. If the events in Tunisia and Egypt were perceived leftist community is positive, the situation in Libya is a mixed reaction. Very often we hear about externally imposed (whether by the United States, or the mythical "Al Qaeda") attempt to destroy the last bastion of socialism in Africa.There is talk of an uprising of "wild Bedouin tribes" against "modernizer and Candle civilization Gaddafi. They also say the threat of coming to power of Islamic fundamentalists who allegedly standing behind the insurgent masses. Some have even called the protests in Libya "counterrevolution." In support of the current regime advocated, inter alia, the leader of the Cuban revolution, Fidel Castro. On the other hand at least a significant part of the Left (such as the Trotskyist International Committee for the work, a number of anarchist groups, etc.) consider the events in Libya as part of the revolutionary upsurge in the Middle East, their sympathies - clearly on the side of the insurgents.
3.In our view, quite wrong to call the Libyan revolt "a counterrevolutionary." Counter-revolutionary protests can only be in a progressive revolutionary transformations. At one time the September coup in 1969 actually wore a progressive character, and then Gaddafi, of course, was a revolutionary. However, today there is every reason to speak about the degeneration and regeneration, even the Libyan regime.Neoliberalism in Libya confidently stepping on the remains of the "socialist" elements in the economy. Pushing a neo-liberal reform after another, privatizing the property for his own family, creating a bureaucratic clan from prikormlennogo environment, Gaddafi did not take the interests of those classes of persons whom he performed in the early period of his reign. Libya signed an agreement to comply with the rules of the IMF, the oil sector employs over 30 international companies in 2008 had been privatized the largest bank in the country.According to some reports, the total value of wealth the ruling family may be from 80 to 130 billion dollars - that is the reverse side of ostentatious "modesty" the Libyan leader, a lover of traditional Bedouin tents and clothes. At the same time, the level of social protection in Libya does not as high as claimed by the defenders of the regime. So, the son of Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam, argues that the city of Benghazi, which was originally started the rebellion, there were no hospitals or universities.In the political sphere, despite claims of "Jamahiriya" (direct democracy), the regime differed little from the regime of the late Brezhnev era. There was censorship, the ban on political parties (for violating the ban - the death penalty!), Independent trade unions and social organizations. In fairness it should be noted that the system of elected "people's congresses" really exist, have occurred even precedents when Gadhafi was forced to adjust their position to their pressure. But in parallel with the people's congresses have always been, another, the real power structure, controlled the police, army and media.This is a classic bureaucratic system, fully controlled by the ruling family. "The anti-imperialist" rhetoric Gaddafi too long ago turned into empty words: the Libyan leader has close ties with Berlusconi, Putin and other leaders of the reactionary imperialist powers and the United States ruled Libya from the countries of the "axis of evil." Thus, we can say that the Libyan regime is no longer revolutionary and progressive, and Gaddafi today - it opopsevshy long ago became the world's elite among his former revolutionary type of Ortega in Nicaragua, or the late Arafat.The only reason to support such a regime left - this is the recollection of his past merit.
4. Despite the fact that the regime of Gaddafi ruled the country for nearly 42 years, despite its seemingly stable and declare the nation-wide support, today it is collapsing with astonishing speed. Gaddafi and loyal people control only the capital and some other parts of the country.In many cities, the army and police units move to the side of the insurgents. Their example was followed by Minister of Interior, most diplomats, part of the military leadership, and even one of Gaddafi's sons and his other close relative.
5. Wrong to oppose Libyan events with revolutions in other countries in the Middle East. The protesters, Egyptian and Tunisian workers and young people expressed support for the Libyan uprising. In return, Gaddafi himself after fleeing the Tunisian dictator Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, instructed residents of the neighboring country: "Better Zina you still unoccupied.
6.Against Gadhafi and his regime together really quite disparate forces. Among them, liberal and socialist groups, the Islamic movements, the tip of the Bedouin, a large number of citizens who do not identify themselves with any political trend. Interestingly, the part of insurgents inspired by earlier ideas of the Gaddafi - many adherents set out in the "Green Book" guidelines called Qaddafi "a barrier to achieving this Jamahiriya", because of the concentrated power in his hands and soputsvuyuschego her cult of personality.In general, the events in Libya can be regarded as the beginning of a political revolution against the authoritarian regime. It involved different social forces with different social interests. The task of the working class of Libya and Libyan left in this situation - to move from the general democratic goals of the revolution to the social, to confront not only the hitters in the agony of the regime, but also those forces within the opposition, whiche seek to remove the Qadhafi only in order to more vigorously pursue neo-liberal reforms.
Add new comment