Revolution in Libya “can only be read through the revolutions in the other Arab countries”, especially in #Egypt and #Tunisia

@ShababLibyaLibyanYouthMovement

Republic: Interview with Ashour Burashid and Fathi Mohammed Baja goo.gl/mR8dr #libya #feb17 #gaddaficrimes

1 minute ago via webFavorite Retweet Reply

Retweeted by rev11info_local and others

Fathi Mohammed Baja and Ashour Bourashed, both members of the Libyan National Transitional Council, discuss the Libyan revolution, a couple of months before the fall of the Gaddafi regime. They argue that the revolution in Libya “can only be read through the light of the revolutions in the other Arab countries”, especially in Egypt and Tunisia. The Arab spring, in their view, was not triggered by merely accidental events, but captured a “transformation in the mode of thinking of the Arab people, concerning the relationship between the rulers and the ruled and their notion of a just society.”

---


P.H.: To what extent has the revolution in Libya been influenced by the precedent revolts in Tunisia and Egypt, even the failed ones in Bahrain, or the ongoing ones in Yemen and in Syria?


Ashour Bourashed: The developments in Libya can only be read through the light of the revolutions in the other Arab countries. All these revolutions are not primarily aiming at dethroning or alternating the rulers who held authoritarian political power in their respective countries. Instead, the revolutions captured the popular desire for a change in the type of regime that has been implemented in the Arab countries for the past decades.


This is a historical moment for the Arab world. The revolutions were not triggered by merely accidental events. We are witnessing a transformation in the mode of thinking of the Arab people, concerning the relationship between the rulers and the ruled and their notion of a just society.


The growth of new technologies of communication has been crucial in this process, since it has helped ideas, modes of organisations and the sharing of revolutionary experiences to travel fast across the Arab region.


Fathi Mohammed Baja: The Libyan people had made scattered attempts to revolt against Gadaffi’s regime in the past, in the 1970s, the 1980s, in the 1990s .These revolts were, however, relatively easily isolated and suppressed by the regime. What was different in the current revolution is that the revolutions in Tunisia and in Egypt broke the barrier of fear of authoritarian regimes in the Arab world. We thought, “if the Egyptians and the Tunisians can crowd their governments on the corner, why can’t we”?


The second inspiration provided by the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions is the use of digital networks such as Facebook and Twitter as a means of organising against the regime. The protests during the “day of rage” that spread on February 17, 2011 all over Libya were mainly conceived and orchestrated within these networks that the Gadaffi regime did not know how to control back then.


P.H.: Does the Libyan Transitional National Council have regular contacts with the movements in Egypt and Tunisia? Do you see yourselves as parts of the wider movement aiming to establish democracy in the Arab world?


Fathi Mohammed Baja: There is an intimate relationship from day one of the revolution. On 17 February 2011 a delegation from Tahrir square came to Benghazi to express their support to the Libyan people, bringing also medical aid and equipment.


The Libyan Transitional National Council promotes both official and a unofficial relations with the revolutionary movements in Egypt and in Tunisia. Officially, there is a regular exchange of visits between members of our Council and members of several political parties from both Egypt and Tunisia. There is also close cooperation on the level of civil society: there is cooperation amongst civil rights groups, there are collaborative projects amongst artistic groups in the respective countries, and so on.


P.H.: One main difference in the case of Libya is that the revolution is developing through waging a war against the regime. Are you worried that this necessary militarization of the revolution might deter the development of democratic structures and institutions within Libya?


Ashour Bourashed: After our experience of a 42 year dictatorship under Gaddafi, there is a general will of the Libyan people to overthrow all existing authoritarian structures.


Fathi Mohammed Baja: Gaddafi’s regime is brutal and we knew that it is willing to use whatever means necessary in order to crash the revolution. But, after the liberation of the Eastern part of Libya in just 4-5 days, everybody expected that it would just take a few extra days for the liberation of the Western part as well. Initially, we didn’t believe that we would be forced in an all-out war against Gaddafi’s army.


There is an acute difficulty in implementing a democratic transformation in the midst of war. We have currently a twofold challenge. Our first task is to re-unite Libya through military means or through any international agreement that might be negotiated and to re-instate Tripoli as its capital. Our second task is to create democratic institutions and apply the rule of law. Without overthrowing Gaddafi, however, a complete democratic transformation is not possible.


Ashour Bourashed: One main problem was the absence of a proper army in Libya. The regime had essentially formed militias whose mere task was to protect Gadaffi and his family and to suppress the population. During the revolution, the people were armed with small weapons that they stole from raided police stations. It was with such small weapons that the Eastern part was liberated, but with not much resistance because there were no internal strifes amongst the people: all were united against the regime.


We are not afraid that democratic change is at risk. The main unifying point of the revolutionary movement is the desire to change the political system, it is the desite to create a democratic state.


Fathi Mohammed Baja: The National Transitional Council agreed and published recently its common vision for the future democratic state of Libya. This vision proposes a constitutional state, with a clear separation of powers, a multi-party political system, a free and independent juridical system, a free civil society based on the principle of tolerance, a conception of rights and duties based on citizenship instead of tribal affiliations, and a separation between religious and the political spheres. The Council has also agreed on a roadmap that stipulates the future democratic transition in the period between Gaddafi’s fall and the rise of the constitutional state. This roadmap foresees that with the fall of Gaddafi the National Council will move to Tripoli announcing there the institution of the new Libyan re-public. A committee will be then voted to draft the new constitution and its proposal will be put to a referendum. Another committee will be voted to draft the necessary laws for organising the first presidential and parliamentary elections, where also international observers will be invited to monitor. A transitional government will be formed to oversee this transitional period, but all members of this government, as well as all the members of the existing National Transitional Council, will not be allowed to stand as candidates for these elections. We want thus to show to the Libyan people that we are not seeking power, that our democracy should not be dominated by certain powerful groups of people.


P.H.: Can you refer to some examples of how new institutions are currently build in the liberated parts of Libya?


Ashour Bourashed: Since the revolution broke out, our first priority has been to free the country from the militias. This has been our primary focus so far: how to secure the liberated areas and how to liberate the Western part of the country.


Fathi Mohammed Baja: There are, however, examples of building new institutions in the liberated Libyan cities. For instance, the new institutions are attempting to link security with the respect of human rights as much as possible. We do not want run security institutions the same way that Gaddafi has done for the past 42 years – even during wartime. The secret police has been disbanded in the liberated areas. Security forces are organised by the local authorities and are not directly controlled by the National Council. Anybody who has served in Gaddafi’s regime is guaranteed the same rights with any other Libyan under one condition: that he or she has been inlvoved in acts of killing or violence against the revolution.


Even the people who have been responsible for acts of violence do not get trials under military law, but are taken to civil court where they face an open, fair trial: they have the right to be represented by a lawyer of their choice and can make an appeal against the court’s decision.


Another institutional development in the liberated areas is the birth of a new civil society. We, as the National Transitional Council, are not involved in the development of civil society, we want to maintain this space free from governmental interference. Till now, more that 300 civil society organisations have been formed in the liberated areas, even some political parties amongst them. Most of these organisations are based on volunteer work and they are concerned with various issues: health, the environment, civil rights and so on.


Ashour Bourashed: The National Council has also asked for the formation of a transparency committee from the very beginning of the revolution. This transparency committee is completely independent from the National Council and its mandate is to monitor all financial transactions of the Council and of local authorities. All the foreign aid, for example, that we have been receiving so far and the ways that this is spent is currently monitored by the transparency committee who is allowed to intervene in cases of misdoings. Transparency has been one of the policies that we wanted to instantly implement in the liberated areas of Libya.


P.H.: A final question on communications and information. The Gaddafi regime is still disseminating a huge amount of propaganda both within Libya and in the international scene and this is done through various communication channels, including the internet. How has the Council responded to this propaganda and how does it currently communicate with the people living in the non-liberated areas of Libya?


Fathi Mohammed Baja: Most of the people who were initially involved in instigating the revolution were neither media experts nor they were aware of the importance of the media in the contemporary world. We soon understood, however, that information communication technologies are a powerful weapon in our struggle, as important as military weapons. We had to start from scratch, however, in order to build our own communication and information systems.


We have and are still facing many problems in these efforts. For one thing, Gadaffi and the system he has built are very rich. He is financing media projects in Libya and buys exposure in global media outlets with billions of euros while we can only spent thousands of euros to counter his propaganda. We have found some support, from Qatar in particular, both for setting up our own television station and by opening the door of Al Jazeera to us. Al Jazeera has helped the cause of the revolution by interviewing people on the ground from the liberated areas and members of the Council, making thus our struggle and out political agenda known globally and by exposing the brutalities inflicted by Gadaffi’s militias to the Libyan people.


Another problem we have faced was the propaganda machine that Gadaffi had built, through the help of a specialist communication team who came mostly from Western countries. At first, he accused the revolutionary movement of being separatists, of wanting to dismantle the Libyan state and this propaganda had initially some influence in the Western and Southern parts of Libya. But after the people in Misrata (Western part) and in Zintan (Southern part) also revolted against the regime and the Benghazi council insisted that the revolution will keep the Libyan state intact with Tripoli as its capital, Gadaffi’s line of argument stopped having any sensible ground.


Afterwards, Gadaffi accused us of being Al Qaida sympathisers, of being Muslim fundamentalists in disguise. He claimed that if he were overthrown, Libya would become another Iran, or another Taliban state. We responded by opening up our Eastern borders to all Western and Arabic media and observers and asked them to visit the liberated areas and see what political goals the revolution is aiming at and how it is organising the life of local communities.


We have also countered this accusation by asking our fighters, even those who fight at the front, to shave and wash regularly, in order to prevent Gaddafi’s propaganda machine to seize the opportunity of disseminating images of bearded supposedly Muslim terrorists fighting on our side.


The last stunt of Gaddafi’s propaganda is that he now claims that he is a Libyan national and that he has the right to remain in Libya even if the revolution manages to overthrow him. But, how can we allow this when he has killed more than 30,000 of our fellow citizens?


As far as reaching the population in the non-liberated parts, we have now set up two radio station and one of them is powerful enough to reach Tripoli. We have also set up two television stations – one is also available via satellite and can bypass the regime’s jamming in Tripoli. It is now broadcast via Qatar, but it is in the process of being moved to Benghazi.


We also get help from our allies in the international community and their unmanned airplanes. Half a million leaflets are delivered to Tripoli almost everyday by these airplanes. These leaflets usually contain short messages, like: “We are fighting for one Libya, with Tripoli as its capital”, “We are waiting for your uprising”, “We will continue to fight until all Libya is liberated”, some contain images of the Libyan map showing the advancement of the revolutionary military forces.