“This is a bad time to be a black man in Libya,” reported Alex Thomson on the UK’s Channel 4 News on Sunday. Elsewhere, Kim Sengupta reported for the London-based Independent on the 30 bodies lying decomposing in Tripoli. The majority of them, allegedly mercenaries for former Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi, were black. They had been killed at a makeshift hospital.
“Libyan people don’t like people with dark skins,” a militiaman explained.
The basis of this is rumors, disseminated early in the rebellion, of African mercenaries being unleashed on the opposition.
Amnesty International’s Donatella Rivera was among researchers who examined this allegation and found no evidence for it.
Peter Bouckaert of Human Rights Watch similarly had not “identified one mercenary” among the scores of men being arrested and falsely labeled by journalists as such.
Lurking behind this is racism. Libya is an African nation — however, the term “Africans” is used in Libya to refer to the country’s black minority.
The Amnesty International researcher Diana Eltahawy says that the rebels taking control of Libya have tapped into “existing xenophobia.”
The New York Times refers to “racist overtones,” but sometimes the racism is explicit.
A rebel slogan painted in Misrata during the fighting salutes “the brigade for purging slaves, black skin.”
A consequence of this racism has been mass arrests of black men, and gruesome killings — just some of the various atrocities that human rights organizations blame rebels for.
The racialization of this conflict does not end with hatred of “Africans.” Graffiti by rebels frequently depicted Qaddafi as a demonic Jew.
How did it come to this? A spectacular revolution, speaking the language of democracy and showing tremendous courage in the face of brutal repression, has been disgraced.
Racism did not begin with the rebellion — Qaddafi’s regime exploited 2 million migrant workers while discriminating against them — but it has suffused the rebels’ hatred of the violently authoritarian regime they have just replaced.
An explanation for this can be found in the weaknesses of the revolt itself. The upsurge beginning on Feb. 17 hinged on an alliance between middle-class human rights activists and the working classes in eastern cities such as Benghazi.
Rather than wilting under repression, the rebellion spread to new towns and cities. Elements of the regime, seeing the writing on the wall, began to defect. Military leaders, politicians and sections of business and academia sided with the rebels.
However, the trouble was that the movement was almost emerging from nowhere. Unlike in Egypt, where a decade of activism and labor insurgency had cultivated networks of activists and trade unionists capable of outfoxing the dictatorship, Libya was not permitted a minimal space for civil society opposition.
As a result, there was no institutional structure able to express this movement, certainly little in the way of an organized left. Into this space stepped those who had the greatest resources — the former regime notables, businessmen and professionals, as well as exiles. It was they who formed the National Transitional Council (NTC).
The dominance of relatively conservative elites and the absence of countervailing pressures skewed the politics of the rebellion.
We hear of “the masses,” and “solidarity.” However, masses can be addressed on many grounds — some reactionary. There are also many bases for solidarity — some exclusionary. The scapegoating of black workers makes sense from the perspective of elites.
For them, Libya was not a society divided on class lines from which many of them had profited. Instead, the more success Qaddafi had in stabilizing his regime, the more the explanation for this relied on the claim that “Qaddafi is killing us with his Africans.”
A further, unavoidable twist is the alliance with NATO. The February revolt involved hundreds of thousands of people across Libya. By early March, the movement was in retreat, overseas special forces were entering Libya and senior figures in the rebellion called for external intervention.
Initially isolated, they gained credibility as Qaddafi gained ground. As a result, the initiative passed from a large popular base to a relatively small number of armed fighters under the direction of the NTC and NATO.
Under different conditions, perhaps, unity between the oppressed was possible.
However, this would have required a more radical alliance, one as potentially perilous for those now grooming themselves for office as for Qaddafi. As it is, the success of the rebels contains a tragic defeat.
The original emancipatory impulse of Feb. 17 lies, for now, among the corpses of “Africans” in Tripoli.
Richard Seymour is the author of The Liberal Defence of Murder.
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
There are worrying signs that China is on the brink of a major food shortage, which might trigger a strategic contest over food security and push Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), already under intense pressure, toward drastic measures, potentially spelling trouble for Taiwan and the rest of the world. China has encountered a perfect storm of disasters this year. On top of disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic, torrential rains have caused catastrophic flooding in the Yangtze River basin, China’s largest agricultural region. Floodwaters are estimated to have already destroyed the crops on 6 million hectares of farmland. The situation has been
On Sept. 8, at the high-profile Ketagalan security forum, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) urged countries to deal with the China challenge. She said: “It is time for like-minded countries, and democratic friends in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, to discuss a framework to generate sustained and concerted efforts to maintain a strategic order that deters unilateral aggressive actions.” The “Taiwan model” to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic provides an alternative to China’s authoritarian way of handling it. Taiwan’s response to the health crisis has made it evident that countries across the world have much to learn from Taiwan’s best practices and if