While the likes of South Africa have blundered and regretted, as the country now appears to be doing, Zimbabwe has been consistent in its opposition to Western interference.
By Tichaona Zindoga
Zimbawe has sent the Libyan envoy who defected to the rebel National Transitional Council, packing in a show of Zimbabwe's disregard of the Western-backed movement that overtook Tripoli recently and claimed power.
Taher Elmagrahi who was accredited to Zimbabwe under the Col Muammar Gaddafi government, joined the rebel bandwagon two weeks ago and announced that he recognised the authority of the NTC whose flag he subsequently raised at the Libyan embassy in Harare.
Elmagrahi also took down the official potrait of Col Gaddafi and burned the country's all-green flag.
However, the Zimbabwe Government, which along with the majority of Afica do not recognise NTC, put its foot down and declared the Libyan envoy persona non grata.
Zimbabwe also withdrew its diplomatic mission in Tripoli.
If leadership and inspiration against the imperialist West, the power behind the rebels, was what lacked the day three African countries South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon, voted for United Nations Security
Council Resolution 1973, Zimbabwe certainly has provided it.
Since the March 19 start of the bombardment of Libya by Nato to ostensibly effect a no fly zone to protect civilians from Col Gaddafi, which no sooner assumed an outlook of regime change, Zimbabwe has been one of the most vocal critics of Westen interference in that country.
Last month, President Mugabe came clear and described Nato as a "terrorist organisation".
He said: President Mugabe said Nato was involved in terrorism as it continued to ignore international law.
"If it defies international law. It has no rules and those out blatantly wanting to kill, that is terrorism. That's murderous, brazen murder, assassination and who then can set it as a law-abiding organisation? It has lost its legitimacy, it has become terrorism," he said.
President Mugabe added: "And beware, this they can do on any other African country than Libya. We must always be in a state of preparedness."
And when Zimbabwe expelled the Libyan mission, he was merely making clear the statement that he would not support a regime that is born out of terrorism - more so terrorism coming from erstwhile colonisers on a recolonistaion mission.
But there is even more significance in Zimbabwe's actions.
Having stood up against a decade of Western coercion in form of European Union and US sanctions, Zimbabwe increasingly shows how it champions the rights of African people against Western crusaders.
Zimbabwe has refused to support or endorse the West by proxy.
Zimbabwe has refused to sell her soul.
It is little doubt that as the black gold of Libya - oil - is at stake, any country would stand a chance to tap into the well simply by recognising the NTC.
Already other countries in and out of Africa are anticipating deals that would ensconce them within Libya's apparent next regime.
While the likes of South Africa have blundered and regretted, as the country now appears to be doing, Zimbabwe has been consistent in its opposition to Western interference.
Not much has been heard of Nigeria in the aftermath of the death certificate it signed against the Gaddafi government nor from little Gabon.
But an Africa that has long been looking for a super power to go on the global stage is disappointed in South Africa and Nigeria, either of whom many people tipped would get a UN permanent seat for Africa.
The acquiescence of the two countries to Nato's Libyan crusade while two other global powers China and Russia abstained from voting on UNSC
1973 mortified and disquieted Africa and the progressive world.
Yet no matter how profusely they might justify, or for that matter, apologise the damage has been done.
This is not only to the infrastructure of Libya and the African lives in it, but also the trust in the so-called big boys of the continent.
While Africa licks its wounds, the west rubs its hands in glee for another Marshal Plan.
Libya, which has a danger of slipping into instability, will also be taxed for the damage it suffered.
Africa will be counting on another step towards recolonisation.
As President Mugabe said, which resonates with many observers, it could be Libya today, but tomorrow it can be any other country in Africa.
By Tichaona Zindoga
Zimbawe has sent the Libyan envoy who defected to the rebel National Transitional Council, packing in a show of Zimbabwe's disregard of the Western-backed movement that overtook Tripoli recently and claimed power.
Taher Elmagrahi who was accredited to Zimbabwe under the Col Muammar Gaddafi government, joined the rebel bandwagon two weeks ago and announced that he recognised the authority of the NTC whose flag he subsequently raised at the Libyan embassy in Harare.
Elmagrahi also took down the official potrait of Col Gaddafi and burned the country's all-green flag.
However, the Zimbabwe Government, which along with the majority of Afica do not recognise NTC, put its foot down and declared the Libyan envoy persona non grata.
Zimbabwe also withdrew its diplomatic mission in Tripoli.
If leadership and inspiration against the imperialist West, the power behind the rebels, was what lacked the day three African countries South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon, voted for United Nations Security
Council Resolution 1973, Zimbabwe certainly has provided it.
Since the March 19 start of the bombardment of Libya by Nato to ostensibly effect a no fly zone to protect civilians from Col Gaddafi, which no sooner assumed an outlook of regime change, Zimbabwe has been one of the most vocal critics of Westen interference in that country.
Last month, President Mugabe came clear and described Nato as a "terrorist organisation".
He said: President Mugabe said Nato was involved in terrorism as it continued to ignore international law.
"Look at what they are doing in Libya. Nato, against international law, is attacking Libya under the pretext that they are protecting civilians...Now when they do that deliberately and it is exactly what Al Qaeda and the Talibans do. What is the difference in terrorism between what they are doing and what the other states condemn?"
"If it defies international law. It has no rules and those out blatantly wanting to kill, that is terrorism. That's murderous, brazen murder, assassination and who then can set it as a law-abiding organisation? It has lost its legitimacy, it has become terrorism," he said.
President Mugabe added: "And beware, this they can do on any other African country than Libya. We must always be in a state of preparedness."
And when Zimbabwe expelled the Libyan mission, he was merely making clear the statement that he would not support a regime that is born out of terrorism - more so terrorism coming from erstwhile colonisers on a recolonistaion mission.
But there is even more significance in Zimbabwe's actions.
Having stood up against a decade of Western coercion in form of European Union and US sanctions, Zimbabwe increasingly shows how it champions the rights of African people against Western crusaders.
Zimbabwe has refused to support or endorse the West by proxy.
Zimbabwe has refused to sell her soul.
It is little doubt that as the black gold of Libya - oil - is at stake, any country would stand a chance to tap into the well simply by recognising the NTC.
Already other countries in and out of Africa are anticipating deals that would ensconce them within Libya's apparent next regime.
While the likes of South Africa have blundered and regretted, as the country now appears to be doing, Zimbabwe has been consistent in its opposition to Western interference.
Not much has been heard of Nigeria in the aftermath of the death certificate it signed against the Gaddafi government nor from little Gabon.
But an Africa that has long been looking for a super power to go on the global stage is disappointed in South Africa and Nigeria, either of whom many people tipped would get a UN permanent seat for Africa.
The acquiescence of the two countries to Nato's Libyan crusade while two other global powers China and Russia abstained from voting on UNSC
1973 mortified and disquieted Africa and the progressive world.
Yet no matter how profusely they might justify, or for that matter, apologise the damage has been done.
From now, it would be impossible to trust the fate of Africa in the hands of Africa's preeminent states even if the two countries manage to convince - and even apologise - that they had trusted in the sincerity of the west.
This is not only to the infrastructure of Libya and the African lives in it, but also the trust in the so-called big boys of the continent.
While Africa licks its wounds, the west rubs its hands in glee for another Marshal Plan.
Libya, which has a danger of slipping into instability, will also be taxed for the damage it suffered.
Africa will be counting on another step towards recolonisation.
As President Mugabe said, which resonates with many observers, it could be Libya today, but tomorrow it can be any other country in Africa.
No comments:
Post a Comment