How did Ghaddafi’s checkbook diplomacy affect his role in the African union?
Introduction
In the 1970s and 1980s, Libya under Ghaddafi’s rule backed a lot of anti-imperialism movements, coup-detas and revolutions in Africa. Muammar Ghaddafi’s immense interest in the United States of Africa and his support for significant autocratic leaders of Africa were reflected through his various activities and speeches. There are three theories regarding the bizarre foreign policy of Muammar Ghaddafi on Africa. These are liberation from colonial force, anti-western rhetoric propaganda, and propagating Islam. After decolonization took place in the last half of the 20th century, concepts like colonialism, neo-colonialism, racism, and apartheid were the main subjects over the newly independent states and organizations. Thus, anti-western rhetoric was a key feature of Ghaddafi’s foreign policy.
Ghaddafi had his wealth after Libya started to derive an oil fraction. Many studies implied that when socio economic development grows regimes tend to be more democratic. However, some scholars show there are exception to this which is, if the raising wealth is from oil income, it shrinks democratization and thus tend to be more authoritarian. (Ross and Lewin, 2001) Ghaddafi’s militaristic intervention in some African countries was seen as supporting terrorism and ruining peace. There are different theories which we can put forward for his intervention and diplomatic relations that he had. Since he came to power nearly after the end of Italian colonialism in Libya anti-imperialism was the big appeal that he gave for Libyans and the same could be commented on his intrusions in African countries. It was clearly visible that his political life and foreign relations was shaped by anti-imperialism and/or anti-western rhetoric. Gadhafi’s militaristic and diplomatic influence emerged on Arab nationalism but did not only stop by its reflection, but it also encompassed Pan-Africanism. His all economic and militaristic intervention and effort was not only aiming Arab nationalism or even not only based on any identity or ideology but an interest to attain a regional hegemony using his economic and militaristic power. He supported Ethiopia, significantly a Christian orthodox dominated country, against Sudan a Muslim government under Jaffar Niemiera.
There are some arguments skeptical about his pan African ideas and movements in African union. However, this arouse a question why it is approached with skepticism when a leader in Africa produces idea of continentalist unification merely because he/she is not a Black African. Ghaddafi’s all political moves and diplomatic relations has two faces, one is his ideological based adventure, and the other is his unpredictable and intimately centered on enigmatic persona.
This article will provide the assessment of Muammar Ghaddafi’s intervention in sub–Saharan Africa and how this affected his role in African union. The first section will cover the brief explanation of Ghaddafi’s military and economic intervention in some African countries. The second section will cover his leadership in African union and how the continentalism regionalism debate has begun.
Literature review
After Libyan independence in 1947, economic and political instability fell out in Libya under a monarchical regime. Gaddafi, plotting against the monarchy with the free unionist officers movement for ten years, came to power in 1969 by a successful coup-d’état. He was a 27 year old man when he came to power and neither Cyrenaican nor Tripolitanian he was but a Bedouin from Sirte, which made him appear as an ideal ruler for the then Libya under disputes of federal and regional administrations. This revolution has raised several questions including Libya’s future international role and integrity of the Libyan nation itself. Ghaddafi’s main appeal for Libyans has been to throw colonialism and to change Libya status as a major actor in the international arena rather than those who are acted upon. After some years in rule, Ghaddafi started to derive a large fraction of its revenue from its oil rent and provide social services for its citizens. (Lillian Craig Harris, 1986). However only wealth by itself does not bring democracy, development induces democracy to sustain but does not induce a dictatorship to shift to democracy. (Boix and C. Stokes, 2013, p. 518)
Gaddafi was a dictator not only a dictator but a source of regional and global instability who used his oil wealth to back all kinds of rebellions and trafficking weapons. However, this could rise a question what the source of the instability after Gaddafi’s fall. During his last years especially after 1995 he started to be more diplomatic and chose peaceful solutions and his role in African union has the major effect on this. In the case of Chad, Ghaddafi had two faces one approach was in the 1970s and 80s which showed a gradual change during the 1990s with a soft and peaceful approaches through negotiations and economic relations. Thus, Chad is, Mali apart, the country that is highly affected in the Sahel region by the fall of Ghaddafi and the unsteady instability in Libya after his death. Libya was host for considerable amount of labor migrants of the region. Approximately about one million of labor migrants were forced to leave Libya after the fall of Ghaddafi. (Boas and Utas, p4-6)
In 1971 rebels was popular against the Nimeiry government in Sudan and his prestige was degrading. A communist led coup had succeeded and it was this time Ghaddafi has had his back against the Africanist communist southerners. However, Ghaddafi’s Arabism help offered more risk than benefit and thus Nimeiry decided to give up on the ideological posture of Sudan he incorporated with the Arab world. The agreement he chose to have with the neighbor countries was much more pragmatic for its internal stability, secure borders, and quickened development. The Egyptians were not happy to see Sudanese Defection from the Arab revolutionary camp, but Ghaddafi especially has been more vocal of his disapproval. (Bowyer Bell, 1973) Gaddafi started to have a good relationship with Sudan after the fall of Ghaddafi’s great enemy Jaffar el Nimeiry in April 1985. (St. Jhon, 2008, p.95)
However, the question why Libya showed such an interest in Africa is also doubted by some Researchers. They emphasize on the long-isolated Ghaddafi’s need to gain supporters and a place in foreign policy because of his dwindling popularity in the Arab world. A doubt if it is just a strategic maneuver towards united nations embargo or a structural change of foreign policy.
Gaddafi had also placed his name on the continentalism-regionalism debate of Africa. Together with his election as a chair of African union in 2002, he vigorously proposed the rule of Africa from one center of power which naturally includes central defense force. Although some countries had come with pragmatic approach of regionalism, some leaders had the same vision for Africa as of Gaddafi’s. The summit of Feb. 2004 in Sirte was extraordinary for Ghaddafi called leaders to have a common security policy of African union so that the organization could be able to intervene in the time of internal war and conflicts. This arose a huge skepticism in some of the leaders and had become an issue for a long time resulting the impediment of the closing of African union. (Ramustsindela, 2009)
Ghaddafi in Africa
After decolonization occurred Africa was in search of alternative source of economic assistance, Moreover, after the dissolution of Soviet Union various revolutions and reforms took place in some African countries which call for military intervention for the incumbent power to sustain. Gaddafi backed several movements and independence struggles in numerous African countries such as Mali, Chad, Angola, Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique, Namibia, and Zimbabwe. He had also supported south Africa on its struggle against the apartheid. He had a strong tie with significant autocrat leaders of Africa such as Idi Amin of Uganda and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe which also helps for the consolidation of their authoritarian rules. (Przeworski and Gandhi, 2007)
In the 1970s and 1980s Ghaddafi supported rebellions and protests against the incumbents’ governments in Sudan, Algeria, Somalia, Mauritania, mali, Senegal and Tunisia and military coups in Ghana and Gambia. Libya deployed a military force in Central African Republic to protect President Ange-Felix patasse from coup attempt in 2001. (Solomon and swart, 2005, 472) Ghaddafi was volatile in his intrusions in Africa. He supported Eritrea against Ethiopia under Haile Selassie regime and supported Ethiopia under Derg regime. There was an on and off relation with said barre of Somalia. He once was a supporter of Jaffar Nimeiri in Sudan and later in 1976 he backed a coup against his regime. This kind of his volatile relationships shows he had not a merely ideology-based alliances but an also an interest. (Huliaras, 2001, p.8)
Major Jaffar El Nimeiry came to power in the year 1969, the same as Gaddafi, at the age of thirty nine. He had a traditional military education and he advocated Arab unity and Socialism. he supported a strong Arab connection and united front against Zionism. Major internal regional problem was there in Sudan and among these was the festering southern crisis. There were different sects in Sudan such as radicals southern, communists who do not like the idea of Arab unity because the thought southerners could have an agreement on a genuine African regime but never on united Arab republic. But at the same time Sudan did not have a friend neighbor. Ethiopia, who supported the radical southern, Chad and Central African Republic. For these the radicals felt that Sudan should take an African peace step even if it is at the expenses of Arab republic. However, gaffer Nimeiry was not aware of these and was determined to struggle for Arab civilization with Libya and Egypt, but finally when he realized that there is not any military action that Khartoum can impose, he then tried to protect the internal tranquility by prohibiting secession in a press conference. He had discovered that after the death of Gamal Abdel Nasser the keystone for Arab unity was eroded. He had a regular touch with Ghaddafi, but he did not believe the Arab unity recourse of Nasser’s speech be true with Libya. Later in 1971 when Nimeiry’s popularity was dwindling in the country Ghaddafi had his back. However, Nimeiry did not receive this alliance welcomingly. There is no wonder that Sudan had a clear contradiction between its Arab and African aspirations, and it was hard to prevent it from being represented in their internal life. Thus, for the pragmatic solution of Sudan such as friendly neighbors, internal stability and quickened development Nimeiry chose to cooperate with the Africanists. (Bowyer Bell, 1973)
While Libya’s economic role in Africa helps the foreign policy to easily buy an influence. Libya set to join COMESA (Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa) in 2004. It tried to show his support any African action which advances the economic development of the African continent. Gaddafi’s vision for Africa made an important progress in his inaugural summit of 2002 in transition of organization of African unity to African union. African leaders expressed their determination to achieve a conflict free continent. However, his proposal of united states of Africa with a single leader, united defense force, one trade and foreign policy was rejected. Gaddafi has showed his determination and took some steps to united states of Africa as a pioneer state. He had dropped visa restrictions on Africans and the state-owned voice of Arab world was changed to voice of Africa. However, Libyans and especially Tripolitans were not supportive of these moves. The whole foreign policy and influence making was led by one man without public consultation. This could manifest his single party personalist authoritarian regime, which by some cases also led to his breakdown.
Gaddafi and The African Union
The African union is a political economic and social project of Africa seeking a higher form of cooperation for the continent. The ideological basis of African Union was pan Africanism. Common skin color and shared experience of colonialism was what shaped the main form before independence but faded away after the independence. (Mathews, 2005, p.148)There are some theories that see Ghaddafi’s attempts in African union from the perspective of his dwindling reputation in the Arab world and who thinks the sub-Saharan Africa did not paid off all Ghaddafi’s effort and investment in their country and the African union which any country would not, let alone Libya, after the fall of Ghaddafi. There are some who see this military and economic aid as a manipulation that a rent seeking leader would do to buy power and authority in that state. (Welz, 2013)
Gaddafi started to have an effective influence in the African union after the shift of OAU to AU in Sirte 2002. He presented the proposal of merging the 53 African countries into a united states of Africa with one president, one foreign and trade policy and united military and defense force. this did not get a general acceptance instead. In 2004 summit in Sirte, countries come to an agreement of African union being able to intervene in internal wars and border conflicts. Ghaddafi also tried to create a regional integration with Tunisia in 1974, Chad in 1981, with Morocco in 1984, with Algeria in 1987 and with Sudan in 1990 which all subsequently failed. (Solomon and swart, 2005, p.478)
In this graph I try to indicate the differences that happened in sub-Saharan Africa after Gaddafi had main role in the African union in 2002. Surprisingly civil wars and coups had a slight decrease and stability after 2002 and there is a significant increase in civil liberties.
The African union, as an organization, was supporting the Ghaddafi’s regime during the Libyan crisis of 2011 even though there were some African countries who gave recognition to the Libyan rebel, national transitional council, who led the armed insurrection. This was prominently because African Unions opposition to external given the historical precedent and Ghaddafi was the main dominant supplier of the AU covering 75% of the fonds together with Egypt, South Africa, Nigeria and Algeria. (Murithi, 2012, p.86) On the other hand, the AU’s tepid support was not as vocal as the contribution of Ghaddafi to African Union and sub-Saharan Africa. Ghaddafi’s military and financial contribution was the initial momentum for the creation African union. The first major move toward the union was taken in Libya Sirte declaration in 1999.
Conclusion
Libya’s foreign policy in Africa is open and bizarre to be commented in a various way. We cannot claim his foreign policy is shaped merely by his ideology. He was not just a pan Africanist or an Arab nationalist. Even though being one does not constraint from being the other his interest was clearly visible in both of his stance. His permanent meddling in some countries showed that he had an exploitative foreign policy i.e., a policy designed to benefit the rent seeking individual by buying power and influence.
Tradition and religion and anti-western rhetoric are one of the major sources of his power and legitimacy which plays main role in the survival of his dictator rule. Ghaddafi’s long tenure in power until he got killed by the popular uprising could be credited to his overwhelming monopoly of force and checkbook diplomacy he had. The checkbook diplomacy he had bought most of allies in Africa although some countries were against his dynamic ideologies and skeptical about his moves. Libya is one of the countries that has seen what accounts for the momentum of new authoritarian projects is chaos and danger after upending the status quo. However, we cannot claim one dictator regime to be right or legitimate merely because state situations turned bad after his fall. Muammar Gaddafi was murdered on October 20, 2022, joining the list of authoritarian leaders killed by people uprisings. The Libyan state has never been better after his death, Africa has not been a conflict-free region.
Bibliography
Adam Przeworski and Jennifer Gandhi, Authoritarian Institution and the Survival of Autocrats, Comparative Political Studies, vol.40, no.11, 2007.
Asteris Huliaras, "Qadhafi's comeback: Libya and Sub-Saharan Africa in the 1990s”, African Affairs, vol.100, no.398, 2001.
Carles Boix and Susan C. Stokes, Endogenous Democratization, Cambridge University Press, vol.55, no.4, 2013.
Dawn Nagar and Fritz Nganje, “The African Union: Regional and Global Challenges,” Centre for Conflict Resolution, 2016.
Hussein Solomon and Gerrie Swart, "Libya's Foreign Policy Flux,” Oxford university Press, vol.104, no.416, 2005.
J. Bowyer Bell, “The Sudan’s African Policy: problems and prospects,” Africa Today, vol.20, no.3, 1973.
K. Mathews, “Renaissance of Pan-Africanism: The African Union,” India International Centre Quarterly, vol.31, no.4.
Lillian Craig Harris, Libya, Qadhafi’s Revolution and the Modern State, London, Routledge, 1986.
Maano Ramustsindela, “Gaddafi’s Continentalism and Sovereignty in Africa,” South Africa Geographical Journal, vol.91, no.1, 2009.
Martin Welz, Integrating Africa, Decolonization’s Legacies, sovereignty and the African Union, London, Routledge, 2012.
Morten Boas and Mats Utas, “Post Gaddafi Repercussions in The Sahel and West Africa,” Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, vol.35, no.2.
Ronald Bruce St John, Redefining the Libyan Revolution: The Changing Ideology of Muammar Al-Qaddafi, The Journal of North African Studies, vol.13, no.1, 2008.
Ross, Michael Lewin, "Does Oil Hinder Democracy,” Cambridge university press, vol.53, no.3, 2001.
Tarek Masoud, “The Arab Spring at 10: Kings or People”, Journal of Democracy, vol.32, no.1, 2021.
Tim Murithi, “The African Union and the Libya Crisis: Situating the Responsibility to Protect in Africa,” Journal of African Union Studies, vol.1, no.1, 2012, p.83-88.