The shores of Tripoli....

Posted By Stephen M. Walt Tuesday, January 19, 2010 - 2:51 PM Share

If memory serves, it was the distinguished political scientist Sidney Verba who once wryly advised that "one should never write about a country that you haven't flown over." It's a sardonic comment on the tendency for social scientists to pontificate about countries they barely know, and it sprang to mind during the last leg of my trip last week.

The final item on my itinerary was thirty-six hours in Tripoli, Libya. I was invited to give a lecture to its Economic Development Board, following in the footsteps of a number of other recent American visitors, including Frank Fukuyama, Bernard Lewis, Joseph Nye, Robert Putnam, Anne-Marie Slaughter, and Richard Perle (!).  I'd never been to Libya before, and was looking forward to hearing what the audience had to say.

Unfortunately, my plane from London was five hours late (thanks again, British Airways!), so the scheduled lecture never took place. But I did get to meet with several Libyan officials and spent a few hours touring Tripoli itself.  Mindful of Verba's warning, however, I can't offer anything like an informed assessment, so what follows are just a few quick and provisional impressions.

First, although Libya is far from a democracy, it also doesn't feel like other police states that I have visited. I caught no whiff of an omnipresent security service -- which is not to say that they aren't there -- and there were fewer police or military personnel on the streets than one saw in Franco's Spain. The Libyans with whom I spoke were open and candid and gave no sign of being worried about being overheard or reported or anything like that. The TV in my hotel room featured 50+ channels, including all the normal news services (BBC World Service, CNN, MSNBC, Bloomberg, Al Jazeera, etc.) along with contemporary U.S. sitcoms like "2-1/2 Men," shows like "Desperate Housewives," assorted movies, and one of the various "CSI" clones. A colleague on the trip told me that many ordinary Libyans have satellite dishes and that the government doesn't interfere with transmissions. I tried visiting various political websites from my hotel room and had no problems, although other human rights groups report that Libya does engage in selective filtering of some political websites critical of the regime.  It is also a crime to criticize Qaddafihimself, the government's past human rights record is disturbing at best, and the press in Libya is almost entirely government-controlled.  Nonetheless, Libya appears to be more open than contemporary Iran or China and the overall atmosphere seemed far less oppressive than most places I visited in the old Warsaw Pact.

Second, the Libyans with whom I met were uniformly friendly, smart, and well-informed. For example, I had a discussion with one official about the role of the filibuster in the U.S. Senate, and it was clear that he knew all about it. We had lively conversations about a range of foreign policy issues, and our disagreements were spirited but good-natured.  I asked one group what their impressions of Obama were, and they told me that Libyans were initially thrilled by his election (in part because of his African ancestry), but increasingly disappointed since the inauguration. (Hmmm .... sounds like a a few Americans I know). Needless to say, the administration's failure to translate the lofty pledges of the Cairo speech into concrete policy achievements has been especially discouraging.

My own view (even before I visited) is that the improvement of U.S.-Libyan relations as one of the few (only?) success stories in recent U.S. Middle East diplomacy. Twenty-five years ago, Libya and the United States were bitter antagonists: U.S. and Libyan warplanes clashed on several occasions in the Gulf of Sidra, and Libyan agents bombed a discotheque in Germany that was frequented by U.S. soldiers. U.S. aircraft attacked Libya more than once, targeting Qaddafion at least one occasion (and killing his adopted daughter Hannah). Libya was also held responsible for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988 (though some recent accounts have questioned its culpability) and it had an active WMD development program and received substantial nuclear weapons technology from the illicit A. Q Khan network.

Yet a fortuitous combination of multilateral sanctions, patient diplomacy, and Libyan re-thinking has produced a noticeable detente in recent years. In a rare display of policy continuity, the Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II administrations managed to simultaneously keep the pressure on and keep the door to reconciliation open. (Great Britain played a key role here too, and the effort may have succeeded precisely because Washington remained in the background). This effort paid off in when Libya agreed to dismantle all of its WMD programs in 2003 and to re-engage with the West. (A key part of that deal, by the way, was George W. Bush's decision to explicitly renounce the goal of "regime change," in sharp contrast to his approach to some other countries.)

Libya has also been a valuable ally in the "war on terror" (having had its own problems with Islamic radicals), and Ghaddafi's son Saif reportedly played a key role in persuading a Libyan-based al Qaeda affiliate to renounce terrorism and to denounce Osama bin Laden last year. Overall, the remarkable improvement in U.S.-Libyan relations reminds us that deep political conflicts can sometimes be resolved without recourse to preventive war or "regime change."  One hopes that the United States and Libya continue to nurture and build a constructive relationship, and that economic and political reform continues there. (I wouldn't mind seeing more dramatic political reform -- of a different sort -- here too).  The United States could use a few more friends in that part of the world.

THOMAS COEX/AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:AREA STUDIES, AFRICA, MIDDLE EAST, BUSH'S LEGACY, DEVELOPMENT, DIPLOMACY, NUKES, TERRORISM, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
 

SMCI60652

4:42 PM ET

January 19, 2010

disarmament

"This effort paid off in when Libya agreed to dismantle all of its WMD programs in 2003 and to re-engage with the West. (A key part of that deal, by the way, was George W. Bush's decision to explicitly renounce the goal of "regime change," in sharp contrast to his approach to some other countries.)

Ofcourse there were those that spun this the other way, claiming it was precisely Bush's belligerence that scared the crap out of Ghaddafi.

Their argument goes: Had Bush not invaded Iraq, Muammar wouldn't have taken him seriously.

 

SIR_MIXXALOT

5:25 PM ET

January 19, 2010

Other countries

Imagine if half the talking heads on TV had actually visited Iran.

It is a wonderful country with warm people, even though the govt sucks.

Sound familiar?

 

GRANT

7:44 PM ET

January 19, 2010

It is possible that Libya's

It is possible that Libya's dictatorship is more open than the past would indicate. It is also possible that this was simply what could be seen in a wealthier, more diverse area. I'm not going to say which it is because I don't know, I simply want to encourage people to be cautious with authoritarian governments and praise.

 

DAVE123

7:44 PM ET

January 19, 2010

A slightly different view

A slightly different view from reporter/blogger Michael Totten
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2009/08/in-the-land-of.php

 

DEPETRIS@WORDPRESS.COM

8:40 PM ET

January 19, 2010

Libya As a Model?

Despite all of Libya's improvements- some of which include a significant curtailing of revisionist thinking and more outreach within the international community- the real test for Tripoli will come when Qaddafi relinquishes his post (probably through death). This will be a crucial time for Libya as an independent nation, and a successful leadership transition without blood would do wonders for his legitimacy in the eyes of the world. Lets face it; once Qaddafi is gone, it is highly unlikely that Libya would transform into a democratic society overnight. It may take 10, 20, or 30 years before the shift occurs...if it occurs at all.

But nevertheless, a peaceful post-Qaddafi period (even if Qaddafi's son takes the job) would boost its image in the eyes of both the west and the Muslim world. In North Africa, a stable regime is hard to come by. Perhaps Libya's achievements over the past few years will serve as a model for North Africa more generally (Algeria especially).

Just a gut prediction.

http://depetris.wordpress.com

 

JANBEKSTER

9:32 PM ET

January 19, 2010

Libya.

One would hunbly say that, it is all about the phenomenon in the Arab world; described by the Egyptian political scientist Saad el Din Ibrahim; that of Monarch-Republics, in which the succession of power is within the president of the republic's family.

Certainly President Gaddafi seems to be paving the way for the heir apparent; Mr. Seif al Islam Gaddafi, whom actually and according to his pronouncement is very different to his father when he was the same age. Of course objective conditions have changed now, and Libya is a far cry from the days of the 90s, or 80s, not to mention of course the 1970s.
khairi janbek.paris/france

 

OMBRAGEUX

9:49 PM ET

January 19, 2010

...don't forget Chad!

Libya's misbehavior during the 1980s also included the little known invasion of Chad. The French sent 3000 soldiers to guard the southern half of the country. There was a half-decade long stalemate until Chadians in Toyota trucks (with French Mirage air cover) crushed the Libyans in a few decisive battles.

It totally happened. I think it was something of an "disincentive" for a continued belligerent foreign policy..

 

ANON_ANON

9:26 AM ET

January 20, 2010

Verba - of

KKV Verba? - values metis and verstehen? I'm flabbergasted.

A former student

 

RAMIRES

2:52 PM ET

January 20, 2010

It sounds familiar

Prof. Walt, with all due respect, but your account sounds like some French intellectual visiting Stalinist Russia.

Of course, they have no problem with BBC World, because the moment you quote something critical to the regime, you will simply disappear. Only weak authoritarian regimes resort to censorship, because the freedom of though might create problems for them. In Libya, this is not the case. Qaddafi actually enjoys being criticized, because it shows how powerful he is and fortifies his position.

Libya agreed to surrender its WMD programs because they did not have the capacity to do it and the country was close to bankruptcy. The hospitals in the late 90's didn't have even aspirin. Qaddafi feared a backlash.

You made a Verba disclaimer - quite good indeed, otherwise I would have been much more critical. I enjoy your blog, keep up the good writhing.

 

NUR AL-CUBICLE

12:10 AM ET

January 21, 2010

Retour a Tripoli

Glad to see some Americans back in Tripoli after Reagan (and not the Libyans) kicked them all out. The Libyans turned out at the airport and gave all departing Americans a bouquet and were genuinely sad to see them go. Too bad British Caledonian doesn't fly anymore...great London/Tripoli service.

 

LIBYANO

1:56 AM ET

January 21, 2010

It is indeed a sad day for

It is indeed a sad day for Libya when Dr. Walt lends his support for an autocratic regime that despises political plurality and dissent in all of its forms. While it is unclear as to whether the Harvard professor visited Libya at the behest of the Monitor Group and Livingston Group as his predecessors did, it is clear that he carries the same objective: to justify an illegitimate regime that has imposed its will on a defenseless population for over 40 years.

I can understand the desperation of an administration seeking to justify its illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq - to present Libya as one of the few success stories in the region. However, Dr. Walt's analysis of the facts leave much to be desired. The normalization of US-Libya relations is tantamount to an endorsement of the Gaddafi regime, and all that he espouses: oppression, torture, murder, lawlessness, and tyranny.

While the chapter on US-Libya relations remain unfinished, there remains a significant opportunity to advance US and Libyan interests, now and forever. Through our increased channels of engagement, the US has an opportunity to advance, more than ever before, democratic reforms that advance the rule of law (Libya has been without a constitution since March 2, 1977), political participation, transparency, and accountability. Until then, more and more Libyans will continue to perceive the United States as an enemy. One that was complicit in the theft of its wealth and the silence of its of its democratic activists.

 

Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard University.

Read More