“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.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry