ANALYSIS:The AU has indulged the colonel and many members have benefited from his largesse
THERE ARE a whole host of reasons why the African Union’s proposal to end hostilities in Libya was likely to fail even before its delegation reached Benghazi, the city that has become the rebels’ de facto capital.
The African Union, a body which Muammar Gadafy helped mould before chairing it in 2009, is not viewed as a potential honest broker by the Libyan opposition.
Gadafy’s posturing – declaring himself “king of kings of Africa” and touting his vision of a “United States of Africa” – has long been indulged by the AU, many of whose members have benefited from his largesse. Some of those countries were represented in the delegation that travelled to Tripoli at the weekend, which also included South Africa’s President Jacob Zuma, whose party, the ANC, has received considerable funding from Gadafy. Zuma, who on Sunday referred to Gadafy as “Brother Leader”, did not travel on to Benghazi to meet opposition leaders.
Tellingly, Gadafy has not himself made public the offer of a ceasefire and dialogue over “political reform” that the AU delegation says was agreed when they met him in the Libyan capital. There were reports yesterday of shelling by Gadafy’s forces in the western city of Misurata – if true, this would mark the third instance in the past month that the Libyan leader has violated a ceasefire shortly after declaring it.
The AU said Gadafy agreed to a process of dialogue “with the view to adopting and implementing the political reforms necessary for the elimination of the causes of the current crisis, including democracy, political reform, justice, peace and security, as well as socio-economic development”.
Such promises ring hollow to a population that has heard similar words, particularly from Gadafy’s son Saif-ul-Islam, for several years. It is difficult to see how the Libyan leader, who insists he remains in situ, could reconcile a regime constructed around his own personality cult with anything resembling democracy.
To the opposition’s ears, talk of reform smacks of nothing more than a leader desperately trying to stay in power. More importantly, the rebels argue that, given all the blood shed since their uprising began seven weeks ago, the time for dialogue is long past and Gadafy must go.
Mustafa Abdul Jalil, chairman of the opposition’s transitional Libyan National Council, said the rebels had told the AU its proposal was unacceptable because it left Gadafy in power while both sides negotiated.
“From the very beginning we have been asking that the exit of Gadafy and his sons take place immediately. We cannot consider this or any future proposal that does not include this requirement,” Jalil said. “He leaves on his own or the march of the people will be at his doorstep.”
That sentiment was echoed by thousands of protesters who gathered outside the Benghazi hotel where the AU delegation met the rebels yesterday.
Signs among the crowd read: “No solution with Gadafy staying”.
But those same rebels do not have the military prowess or organisation to defeat Gadafy’s forces. Coalition air strikes have not succeeded in pushing the conflict beyond stalemate. Though the rebel fighters and their supporters are loath to admit it, something approaching fatigue has begun to creep in within their ranks.
The AU initiative is the latest in a round of diplomatic manoeuvrings aimed at breaking the impasse. A Turkish proposal that would have involved Gadafy naming his own interim successor served only to enrage opposition leaders and prompted protests in Libya’s rebel-held eastern flank.
As fighting continues along a front line that seesaws from day to day, a negotiated departure for Gadafy and his family would be the swiftest way of bringing an end to Libya’s war. The question is, who will or could act as a credible midwife for such a process?