Is the standoff in Libya a disguised blessing for Arab democracy?
And if so, will the United States be nimble enough to take advantage?
Fred Hiatt
Editor of The Post’s editorial page, Hiatt also writes a biweekly column and contributes to the PostPartisan blog.
There’s nothing blessed in the suffering of civilians forced to flee the fighting or subjected, in the besieged city of Misurata, to shelling by forces loyal to dictator Moammar Gaddafi. If Gaddafi isn’t forced from power soon, stalemate could evolve into disaster.
But during the past three months, with rebels controlling the east of the country while Gaddafi hangs on in Tripoli, Libyan democrats have had an opportunity their counterparts in Tunisia, Egypt and elsewhere lacked: to prepare to govern, free of influence from the old regime.
And the Libyans, to the surprise of some, have made the most of the chance, assembling a temporary management team that stands for everything Gaddafi’s dictatorship tried to stifle: democracy, the rule of law, a free press and independent civic society.
“Even the graffiti says, ‘We want a country of institutions,’ ” Tom Malinowski, Washington director for Human Rights Watch, recounted after visiting rebel-controlled Benghazi, where he says newspapers, volunteer groups and free political activity are flourishing. “And they don’t want a charismatic leader.”
If so, they seem to have found their man in Mahmoud Jibril, interim prime minister of the Transitional National Council.
Jibril is a soft-spoken businessman who did postgraduate work at the University of Pittsburgh and who comes across as almost excessively honest and reasonable.
His mouthful of a title is a deliberate signal that he and the council do not want to assert power; they are simply managing things, he says, until Libya is united again and all Libyans can vote for a democratic constitution, in a referendum supervised by the United Nations.
He is frustrated that the Obama administration won’t do more to help the rebels, but he explains with some understanding the legal basis for the slowness. He is guardedly optimistic about the prospects for democracy — “Maybe we have some shot,” he said during a visit to The Post on Wednesday — but understands why outsiders might be skeptical.
Egypt at least has a history of political parties and coffeehouse debate; Gaddafi’s totalitarian rule left little room for that. Yet, Jibril says, because there were no parties, the opposition has not become polarized.
“We have no organizational history — but we have a structure to be talking to the world,” he said. “So this is a case to be studied.”
Jibril’s optimism has roots in something deeper than what has been accomplished during this interim period. He draws his hope from the difference he sees between his generation and the young people who have stirred revolution across the Arab world.
Jibril’s generation demonstrated against imperialism or for Arab unity or Palestinian statehood, he says, and it talked about “demands, needs, wants.”
The new generation, he says, “talks about democracy, talks about a dignified life.” And, he says, “These people have no fear whatsoever. They are completely the opposite of our generation, where fear is a central part of our cognitive system.”
Loading...
Comments