Participating in Positive Change

Agendia Aloysius' line of duty

header photo

Libya: An Ivorian scenario lurking: Allied forces and the Allied media- My suggestion

By Aloysius AGENDIA

Co-incidentally, the first American president who has continuouslyColonel Gaddafi pounded an African nation with bombs and in the process allegedly killed hundreds of civilians and destroyed non military targets is an “African American”, and again, the first African American president of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama. 

A lot has been written in different forums on the right and wrongs of the decision of  the USA, France and UK to lead an invasion force into Libya under the bogus claim of averting a humanitarian disaster.

It all began on March 17 with a controversial no-fly zone  imposed on Libya but curiously, the first people to breach the no-fly zone were the occupational forces who did not only bomb Libyan air defence system but again also bombed several buildings among which was one of Gaddafi’s residence. We wonder if that was equally some type of air defence bombings.  Over 210 tomahawk missiles, each costing 1.2 million dollars were used within the first few days of the aggression and these missiles will need to be replaced and other overheads of the campaign paid. Who will foot the bills? That is a question that I am not delving into it.

I am in no defence of Colonel Gaddafi because I think he has overdue in power and should have left the scene. However, I am as well against the invasion of any country by blood and oil hungry nations in the name of liberation or spreading freedom.  Every nation must be allowed to handle its affairs.

What happened in Libya and described by pro-rebel allied media outlets as a peaceful protest was more of a poorly planned foreign backed military insurrection by rebels which needed to be stopped just as any nation would do.  The arrest of a British spy mission in the rebel held part of the country in March also adds more flesh to the claims of the foreign backed rebellion.  Unfortunately, most corporate media spread outright lies about the “massacre” in Libya and pushed up international emotions in a bid to justify the invasion of the country just as it was the case in 2003 with Iraq.

As the invasion continues, allied media organs continue to report that civilians are being massacred by Gaddafi forces without any proof to buttress the claims.  I watched an Al Jazeera report from a hospital and in the report, the journalist claimed that the hospital had been bombed though he could not show that part of the hospital bombed. He also claimed the mortuary was so overwhelmed though he could not show any evidence. All we could see were a seemingly make up of a few nurses rushing up and town in the hospital.

It is understandable that Al Jazeera, a pan Arabic media should stand against Gaddafi who though an Arab was more of a Pan Africanist. This explains why even western backed dictatorships like the ones in Qatar which finances Al Jazeera have also sent war planes to Libya, just as like the United Arab Emirates.

The same media organs are spreading lies and half truths that black Africans form a large number of forces fighting for Gaddafi. This is just to push Libyans against their fellow African brothers. This is also  because Gadaffi was a proponent of African unity and presenting black Africans as mercenaries like BBC, Al Jazeera, France 24, CNN  and other Allied Media are doing  is appealing to the sentiments of Libyans to turn against black Africans. In Benghazi and other Allied-rebel held territories, it is reported that it is dangerous to be identified as a black African in that area.  

Among Northern African nations like Morocco (not part of the AU), Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria and Libya, only Libya through Gaddafi actually identified with Africa and Africans. The rest of the countries believe that they are in a different continent. This does not mean that Gaddafi hadn’t his own short comings with respect to the treatment of mostly African migrants seeking to enter Europe. With an imminent overthrow of Gaddafi and the imposition of a puppet regime, Libya’s hitherto African connections may be cut so that it joins the ranks of her other neighbours in the Maghreb who have snubbed the continent.

 Are Allied forces spreading freedom, liberalism, capitalism or the NWO?

Some people have likened what sparked the chaos in Libya to that of Egypt and Tunisia, but I consider that as being too simplistic. While Tunisia and Egypt were led by bloody and corrupt dictators supported by France and America, Libya was not the case. The Hosni Mubarak in Egypt and Ben Ali in Tunisia together with their allies lived in affluence and embezzled billions of their people wealth while the masses lived in abject poverty. This is   not actually the case in Libya where all the citizens live far above the poverty level. They have access to state of the art health care, good housing, free education etc. In fact, the UNDP report put Libya as virtually the best place in Africa with even income levels and access to health care in that nation far better than some western European countries; talk less of eastern European countries. To therefore justify or analyse the situation in Libya in relation to what happened in Egypt and Tunisia was completely out of point or being dishonest.

Some have claimed that a free world headed by the United States of America could not sit back and see people being slaughtered by a bloody dictator like Gaddafi. Unfortunately, these declarations now being spread by people are the cooked up stories by corporate journalists. It is understandable the Gaddafi promised hell to terrorists and I think any leader must not sympathise with terrorists. However, this does not cancel the fact that Gaddafi’s political communication strategists did not planned well. In my view, they would have advised Gadaffi to tell the rebels to group themselves in political forces and prepare for elections.

However, that said, there is no notion as “free world” as some of us backing the invasion of Libya have claimed.   The truth is that some have taken others hostage economically through horrible and virtually forceful economic reforms like those piloted by the Breton Wood institutions. Others have taken some hostage militarily using their military superiority.

The usual cover note for such killings, economic and military invasions by allied nations is what has been described as democracy. However, the notion behind such bogus concepts of democracy as planned by the belligerent imperial states is nothing short of imposing capitalism and liberalism, which to some people, is the “free world” they are talking about. However, in actual sense, it is paving way for the absolute exploitation of the poor by rich. There is absolutely no notion of a free world in connection to what is happening in Libya just as it has been the case in Cote D’ Ivoire and several other nations.


The Cote D Ivoire syndrome in Libya? - My suggestion

 The current chaos in Libya may end up in different ways;

I) Colonel Muammar Gaddafi may end up sharing power with the rebels as the government of Cote D ‘Ivoire was forced to share after the 2002 abortive coup d’état.

 ii) Libya may as well end up being a divided country into a rebel held and government controlled areas as it is the case in Cote D’Ivoire.  

iii) The country may be engaged in a long civil war as is the case in Somalia or DRC.

iv) Some forces may come up with the suggestion that the country be divided as some people futilely suggested for Cote D Ivoire.

v) The government of Gaddafi may end up capitulating or being topple as the current government of Cote D’Ivoire after bogus elections in which the UN condones fraud just as they did in Afghanistan.


However, what I would suggest for Gadaffi to help curbed the situation is to ask the rebels to disarm, create political parties and contest in elections.  Such elections must be observed by the Africa Union and Arab League with clear terms agreed upon by both belligerent sides. The EU must be kept out of such elections and one of the rules should be that any camp which affords to rig will immediately lost all elections in such areas.

Gaddafi should not allow his country to be destroyed by people who are either just hungry to kill, destroy or who are just jealous of his nation or need resources not necessarily to boom their economies but to enrich the world governing CEOs who head and manage various multinationals.

A free and fair election in Libya is therefore the key solution to the current impasse. If after such polls Gadaffi and his supporters lose, then they must admit defeat and stand down from power. However, I am afraid that in rebel held areas, it may be a replica  where Ivorian opposition leader Alasane Ouattara his rebels  in the  North of Cote D'Ivoire rigged elections with impunity but the UN declared the rigger,  winner. I foresee a similar situation in Libya and that will only divide the country more and in such a state the invading countries may loot it better. A united Libya will be a weakness for invading forces. However a divided Libya or a Libya controlled by the so called rebels will be a victory for those who have destroyed Libya with bombs under the bogus claim of averting a humanitarian disaster.

Go Back

you are one of the best journalist one could find around. i like th way you talked on cameroon most vocal journalist killed in the u s.this is what most people should know, especially those in power ,journalists have the right to right whatever wrong they see around them,more grease to your elbow hoping to be like you.journalists should copy the footsteps of pius njawe.


austin ngenge

Boy you are off the hock. go back to history classes.


Libya, ivory coast and the rest of africa is experiencing the re-awakening of the berlin conference that brought immense benefit to the organizers of that meeting


Is interesting that so many people, unfortunately mostly Africans, think that it was ok for Gadaffi to open fire on peaceful protesters. The question that Aloysius AGENDIA should answer before jumping into conclusion is that why did America not interven in Tunisia and Egypt? The answer is simple, the army in those countries did not open fire on civilians.

It is true that there are other countries where people are being sluaghtered by their leaders and the US (and UN) have done nothing. I don't think the US will want to interven in North Korea or Iran because it will be a more costly fight and more innocent preople will surely die because those countries are well armed. They tried in Somalia but unfortunately the civil war in Somalia turn into tribal (clan) wars with different clans fighting each other. Nobody wants to get involve in a war like that which has no meaningly purpose.

I hope that when Paul Biya unleashes his fire power on innocent Cameroonians one day in the same way that Gadaffi did and promises to show no mercy, Aloysius AGENDIA will not go out calling for help from the international community.


To think that Libyans know what they are doing beats my imagination. Give Cameroonians all that Libya has and the opposition is dead.
I know Cameroonians who have held administrative positions in the country and still go seeking asylum in US. Is that to say that they were not fine in the country?
While I do not support Gaddafi for staying too long. I do not think selling Libya to hungry western powers is the best thing that can ever happen to that country.
The fellas are already at table now, deciding how they will share the booty amongst themselves even before the crises is over.
They call if a conference on the future of Libya and they are holding it in Paris.
I wish they could even hold it in Ghana or some African country, or at least invite one African country.
The Libyans will certainly regret their actions. The price will be too high.


This writes are pure subjective journalism.


Gaddafi like most African leaders who think they are the only ones to rule is complete greed and questions their motives.
Why on earth should he rule for four decades? He might have given the Libyans all they wanted but that does not rule out the quest for a liberal society. If Gaddafi was wise from the onset, he would have agreed to step down after reorganizing Libya. Instead he was supported by his children who occupy key positions to start fighting and killing peaceful demonstrators.
Whatever happens to Libya, no matter how much he had achieved as leader, as mediator or representative of the African Union, his stance in this crises discredits him.
I hope other leaders who are wearing his same trade mark on their shoes would learn a lesson.
He cannot ask the rebels to disarm now because he has lost the power behind his voice and it is gone for good. The rebels understand one language now, Gaddafi Must Go!!!


Austin Ngenge,

Sorry man you don't know the story of Africa. Do you know Thomas Sankara?


For a deranged leader who refers to his people as "rats" just because some think they cant stand him anymore is simplistic and misleading.He and his family have also embezzled much of the wealth of the country and if i sight my source you might just discredit it as being anti african.If Libyans live so well as you claim why are still many struggling to brave the perilous journey accross the Mediterenean to the Europe.Gadaffi is a power drunk maniac who has gone delusional because of absolute power.
He just like his african and maghrebian colleagues are only interested to be in power forever.All his pan-african garb is because he sees himself as some kind of person above black african leaders.His vision for african unity is one that allows him to be the leader for all Africa. Yes he helped ANC fight against apartheid just like Nasser was a champion(who helped to shelter many) of real African nationalists who had been betrayed by the western back traitors we now have in power everywhere.If you doubt this fact go back to history and find out where Pauline Opango Lumumba raised the orphans of the betrayed Lumumba,it was in Egypt,find out where Felix Moumie and co ran for shelter when they were the targets of french neo-colonial scheming with Ahidjo at the helm,Egypt formed part of thier route to exile.
Therefore i find it equally misleading for someone to just say they maghreb has snuubed black Africa,there are many elements that contradict that claim.Why do the countires take part in the CAN if they have snubbed the rest of the continent?
While i am not also saying the west be given a blank cheque to interven in places as they did in Libya we must begin by calling on the likes of Gadaffi and Gbagbo who think of none but their cliques to know that the time for that kind of leadership is long gone.Just like their peers in other african countires we seem all the time to blame the west for bad leadership in Africa.What has the west got to do when an african leader decides puts his tribe or ethnic group before the rest of the population?
The sit tight despots who mostly siezed power from nationalist leaders set up by the out going colonial regimes have turn out to be the worst curse for Africa.As the end draws near for Gadaffi i hope his freinds in other countries are taking note.Who next?


Infact you guys have said it all. As you said earlier, Libya is an African but it is only the Arabs that were consulted. Infact, if you look at the history of Gaddafi, you will see what the African future is.He help liberate blacks in S.Africa and many other conflict zones in Africa. He has been against western imperialism. The libyans shall regrets what they have done to themselbves.Africans should help Gaddafi now and if not, it will be spread to other nations.We need to fight with Gaddafi now. We should send men to help him now.