LIBYA | A Western Disaster?

[@JamesKerLindsay]

This is a conflict I have wanted to look at for a very long time. Libya has been one of the most complex civil wars of recent years. And it has prompted a lot of soul searching amongst observers. So, was it a mistake to get rid of Gaddafi? Or could he never be trusted and would have eventually become a problem again? As ever, I look forward to your thoughts and comments.

[@QuizmasterLaw]

Libya's a total disaster: that was the *objective* Punish the socialists, punish the Israelis opponents and preferably do it at the cost of someone else. I guess you bough the liberal lies that it was all about human rights democracy and rule of law?

[@SashaArsic]

What was done to Lybia and Gadafi was not a mistake, it was a big crime.

[@Houthiandtheblowfish]

it was a disaster but a good disaster a unique taste, an aquired taste

[@AL-lh2ht]

@@SashaArsicit was literally a civil war. The level of racism and self hatred is insane.

[@karimmaasri1723]

I think the West is damned if it intervenes and damned if it doesn't. Gaddafi had to be removed. He was threatening to annihilate those opposing him...his own people! The chaos that followed his assassination is totally expected. The Libyan people have been under absolute rule since independence. In summary, Gaddafi was too eccentric and dangerous and ruthless and he made sure to leave the Libyan people in the middle ages.

[@deleoladeji8246]

This is a discussion in the West, but not anywhere else. In Africa, like in other places on earth, we know that Libyan war was premeditated by Nato and western leaders to overthrow Gaddafi. When six African leaders boarded a plane early in the conflict to go to Tripoli and mediate between warring parties, Nato bluntly told them that their plane would not be permitted to land. General Wesley Clark of Nato put it succinctly, US mapped out the wars to overthrow seven middle eastern governments by military power, starting immediately after 9/11. It was about dominance, hegemony, and resources.

[@mirrezaultarique3437]

Well said. Hope political leaders and commentators make this point as well.

[@heinzaballoo3278]

Do you have any more evidence? That is a very serious claim.

[@Faiez-rh1gm]

9:11 was an inside job done by Mossad and CIA.Just to invade Iraq

[@Homer-OJ-Simpson]

@@deleoladeji8246that doesn’t sound like a fact, it sounds like Qanon theory but one made up by those the defend autocracies like u

[@Homer-OJ-Simpson]

@@deleoladeji8246 “NATO”. So you didn’t want the video? UN approved and supported by Arab league. Do you have an ability to be honest?

[@klausunder8876]

the european "migrant crisis" was 100% exacerbated by the overthrowing of Gaddafi. Libya was a stable nation before his demise but now a vacuum of modern slavery and human trafficking has been left. His regime could've led to Libya being a great alternative to Russian oil and nat gas.

[@abanerjee5066]

But you thought you were told to believe that Gaddafi was an evil person.

[@captainalex157]

@@abanerjee5066 he was evil, doesnt mean you cant make a deal with him ;)

[@abanerjee5066]

@@captainalex157 Tell me who isn't evil? Tell me which western politician isn't evil? Politics makes a man evil. Politics can change the behaviour of a human being. Just because he was evil you depose him and murder him in the middle of the streets???? Now where is the west who talks about human rights violation? Don't you think murdering him like that violates human rights violation. What happened to the people who killed him? Were they ever held accountable? No.

[@Dimich1993]

Gaddafi was about destabilizing the world, just like russia was and is.

[@LarzGustafsson]

Absolutely.

[@tapsontmlambo2425]

Regime change can be fatal within a country. It is important for foreign nations to respect other countries internal affairs.

[@maliksy7746]

Right and that's something that the Western world can't seem to comprehend

[@LoverOFhopeANDcompassion]

Goodluck telling that to western Europe (Nazis) and kkkusa.

[@peterklausner9727]

Good luck telling the US that.. Hypocrisy is the US 's biggest export. (Allegedly).

[@INTJ791]

​@@LoverOFhopeANDcompassionNazi invade France, Libya not invade Egypt, and Algeria, Gaddafi give support to Islam conservative the same way Spain and Sweden support nazi, logistics

[@shmug1968]

what do you mean by foreign nations? Why don't you just say US and UK who want to keep control over the world and will do whatever to it takes.

[@Loud-mouth]

The influence of US and Britain on African countries is painful

[@worldsnomad]

Same in Eastern Europe especially in Balkans

[@lorcansnow2111]

US and France moreso.

[@methuselahbenyah6745]

The arms of Babylon. They will all perish.

[@Homer-OJ-Simpson]

And now the influence of Russia and China in African countries is painful.

[@methuselahbenyah6745]

@@Homer-OJ-Simpson Russia 🇷🇺 and China 🇨🇳 come with plans that will stabilize Africa dynamically. The US come with threats of changing LGBTQ laws. How is stability painful?

[@elkanaajowi9093]

To the Western corporations, which I presume are now milking oil and pushing down endless loans to the country, the result is precisely what they wanted. Free-market, rule of law, and our way of life. This line never fails to get support; even if the reality is completely worse.

[@barriewright2857]

Absolutely correct 👍🏿.

[@Bell_plejdo568p]

Wdym "Free-market, rule of law, and our way of life" this is was all done on purpose

[@salogenosse]

There is no Free-market and rule of law in international trade. There is only the terrorist dictatorship of Washington and NATO, staged 90% of all wars since the end of WWII to prevent free-market in international trade.

[@icemike1]

Always follow the money

[@yaoliang1580]

Much worse

[@orpheus1662]

Libyans asked for democracy and the got it. They got tired of free education free healthcare free housing

[@Homer-OJ-Simpson]

Yeah, India so much dislikes their democracy. They so wish to go back to the days before democracy. /s, have to add the tag because supporters of autocracies will think I’m serious

[@FabledCity]

As someone who was on the ground there in 2011, I tend to think that if NATO air power had not been brought in Gaddafi may indeed have survived the initial conflict in the form of a rump state in Libya's northwest. But the peoples of Cyrenaica in the east, there was no turning back with or without Western military support. Also the UAE and Qatar were involved in supporting rebel factions right from the start and there is a hypothetical that if Western powers had not intervened the then emerging GCC powers eventually may have at some point. I met the Qatari defence minister on the ground in rural Tripolitania at the time as an indicator of how seriously the Qataris were taking this conflict. But the fact remains that neither the NTC, NATO, no the GCC had any concept of what a post Gaddafi Libyan state should look like.

[@علي-ش7ث8ب]

But the fact remains that neither the NTC, NATO, no the GCC had any concept of what a post Gaddafi Libyan state should look like. You're kidding right?

[@ShubhamMishrabro]

That's what engraged Arabs won't tell you this

[@علي-ش7ث8ب]

@@ShubhamMishrabro it seems that you're the one who's enraged!

[@ShubhamMishrabro]

@@علي-ش7ث8ب yes i was waiting for comments like this. I'm very enraged nice counter argument

[@skp8748]

​@@ShubhamMishrabroUAE, Russia, France and Greece supported Haftar another despot.

[@electricVGC]

I think the takeaway was that countries shouldn't interfere in domestic governance through violence and assassinations

[@Bigwillystyle707]

​@@雷-t3jwith the help of NATO bombing and air superiority

[@agnelomascarenhas8990]

That's jumping to conclusions about a complex system with just one sample. Execution in a complex environment cannot be predicted. US lost in Vietnam, Soviets lost in Afghanistan. The failure to have a functioning govt in Libya falls into the category of complex tasks.

[@Bell_plejdo568p]

@@agnelomascarenhas8990 No they wanted to this, they want libya in this situation, also no countries should intrvenue in the affairs sof a anohter country

[@Bell_plejdo568p]

it was all done on purpose

[@supersurfer1]

@@agnelomascarenhas8990usa lost in Afghanistan too

[@JustinZode]

Gadaffi was incredibly based. Rest in power, King.

[@Homer-OJ-Simpson]

“King”. To an autocratic ruler that sponsored terrorism

[@JohnDoe-zo7xn]

I didn't realize Gaddafi was 27 when he launched the coup. Thats really really impressive

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Yes, he was astoundingly young!

[@calvinsuu1949]

Well back then 27 was like 40

[@supersurfer1]

The issue is the western audience are not very well educated about international affairs as they are spoon fed propaganda by the state.

[@jeffhicks8428]

Gaddafi was an interesting and amazing guy. you should try seeking the truth rather than bs Anglo American distortions about him.

[@giselameunier4788]

he wanted the best for his people, his mistake was to create a new money the petol euros, that 's why usa killed him, now the BRICS do the same only US helpless

[@banto1]

Foreign governments intervening to dispose a country's problematic leader has been tried over and over again across the middle east. In almost all cases, the result is worse than the problem they were trying to solve. After the disastrous results in Iraq, Egypt, and Libya, we can understand the great fear of toppling the genocidal dictator in Syria - since his replacement would probably be even worse.

[@LarzGustafsson]

Chile became a disaster in September 11, 1973, when Allende was toppled.

[@johnr797]

Genocidal dictator of Syria? Lol.

[@esense9602]

The last time I check the definition of dictator, I can't find the term "a Western enemy or not friendly to West leaders".

[@np4029]

​@@esense9602Dictators around the world thank you for your efforts to whitewash them.

[@idraote]

@@LarzGustafsson And Allende was a democratically elected leader. He might have been a marxist but he was not a dictator. His replacement, on the other hand...

[@Bb13190]

The fall of Kadafi's regime is also suspected to have facilitated the uprising in northem Mali by releasing a big quantity of weapons in the Sahara region.

[@milibibi2152]

"not suspected"... NATO called them "rebel" and gave them a lot of money and guns now they are "terrorist" still funded by the west but nobody want to talk about that. We are tired in Africa.

[@RoukiatouBERTE]

Facts. I am Malian.

[@milibibi2152]

@@RoukiatouBERTE oui c'est un scandale ce qui se passe au Mali mais le peuple africain soutien le Mali même si nos gouvernements sont des lâches....on les a pas choisi. Le Mali est un beau pays j'ai hâte de le visiter dès que la situation sera plus stable...ça fait peur combien de temps cela va durer...courage

[@Godspower-g7n]

Most recent crisis including migrants all have roots after the fall of gadaffi

[@anthonyomoko6433]

Col Muammar Gaddafi will always live in the heart of all men of goodwill!

[@18breaths66]

History will remember him as a hero who stood against waning European imperialism.

[@durranaik]

He stood up against persecution of Palestine and they thought they'd make an example out of him. How it backfired on them.

[@savinggrace121]

Yes he did, but he also tortured his own people.

[@18breaths66]

@@savinggrace121 Like George Washington, Andrew Jackson, Winston Churchill, Ronald Reagan etc…… Show me a “Hero” without bloody hands? Most we call hero in the west aren’t even righteous

[@shmug1968]

Exactly!

[@MmmM-uo6ti]

KARMA in coming to Cristian Europe people's!!!

[@mrgabagoo580]

Same story different day. The West topples a strong man/regime in the Arab world without a clear and realistic plan for what comes next. Gaddafi had many negative sides, but a few positives too. The way he was eliminated by our proxies was as clear a demonstration of what was to come as one could wish for. A disaster for Libya's living standards and internal stability, undoubtedly. However, for Western global policy it has been an unmitigated catastrophe. We have created a refugee and humanitarian disaster on our doorstep. We have indicated, once again, to any second or third rate power that their only serious guarantee of security is developing WMDs. The Russians took note of the mission creep and one more infamous example of Western hypocrisy and exceptionalism regarding the "rules based order." The events in Libya have confirmed in Russian decision making minds: - The rules based order is a cover for Western 'do as I say, not as I do' realpolitik - The West cannot be trusted and can only be negotiated with from a position of strength - Strike first or be struck first - The Western powers will act irresponsibly and without concern for the consequences for perceived short term gain - If we do not protect our allies and friends to the hilt, the West will destroy them and finally us

[@yoloswaggins7121]

Libya is by far the worst example. At least there was a plan in Iraq and Afghanistan and they attempted to set up democratic governments and kept troops in the country to keep order. In Libya they just bombed Gadaffi's forces and then sat back and did nothing while Libya devolved into chaos.

[@zeroyuki92]

​​@@yoloswaggins7121did the plans even worked at all, though? Pretty sure Taliban becoming an undisputed ruler and Iraq getting way closer with Iran wasn't in the plan at all.

[@bernardoohigginsvevo2974]

@@zeroyuki92 I think what's he's getting at is that we at least had a plan in those cases.

[@salogenosse]

It was the original goal of the US to shut down the free international market and occupy Europe and Asia economically and politically. The US and NATO are occupiers, greedy dictators and terrorist organizations, staged 90% of all wars since the end of WWII. There's how it works.

[@utubemewatch]

@@yoloswaggins7121 they had no plan because all the prior planning of earlier invasions/coups failed. They thought they were being prudent - I know it’s absurd, but true. But it’s not even real-politik any longer, it’s not Morganthau’s realism. It’s hardly even rational. It’s become this messianic political religion. This tautology that these midwits are destined to save the world and deliver it from the vicissitudes of human nature. Therefore the means are always good and moral, and bad ends simply signify the malevolence of some other actor, or the inferiority of invaded state to govern itself. What was once Geopolitical realism has descended into Gnostic cultism with key features of an inability to learn from the past, extreme culture chauvinism and high disgust reaction, self-ordained moral superiority, an ignorance of detail, group think, and the strange case of a superpower believing it’s own propaganda designed to deceive its sovereign (the people). The only geopolitical consideration left is whether the country in question has vast natural resource wealth, or extremely valuable strategic position. That’s it. The rational has devolved into instinctual and reactionary. And in many ways, the failed politicians and 4 stars often attain greater personal wealth and power through failure and lies, than they do through success and honest brokering. We only have 4 true defense contractors, essentially working hand and glove to deliver every contract late, above budget, and below expectations, with massive cost overages projected long into the future. It’s become uncompetitive and diffuse. You can’t distinguish officers from politicians, from lobbyists, from contractors, from stock investors. It’s what Americans refer to as “socializing the losses and failures, capitalizing the profits; and always too big to fail”. The mendacity of neo-con neo-liberal uniparty swamp of DC is legion, and legend.

[@lerryperry]

@JamesKerLindsay I am a black man from Jamaica and my view on this issue and others like it is simply this: When a tyrant is oppressing his people in his country, it is the job of those people to overthrow him. There should be no outside interference. The only time that other countries should move against him is if he does the same thing that Hitler did in the 1930s. I rest my case.

[@amirabdulazeez3241]

Dear Jamaican friend- understand the simple fact about politics- when 1 tyrant steps down another one takes its place . That’s how it has always been See the Latin American cartels for example- Pablo Escobar ( Columbian cartel ) stepped down , El Chapo took its place ( Mexican cartel ) So there will always be tyrants . The point is to have stability in the region to the extend possible

[@drewski1441]

The only issue is Gaddafi WAS NOT a tyrant!! From North Africa to the Middle East, pretty much all those countries are led by Emirs, Crown Princes or Kings. Libya now has open slave markets. Western powers which includes NATO, have no moral right to decide the faith of any country in the world. They killed Gaddafi to privatize the Libyan oil companies for Western profits. Majority of Libyan oil goes to Europe, hence NATO involvement. This is why they are angry but cannot stop Iran, NATO and America Doesn't have the fortitude or appetite for a war with Iran. The price they would pay for losing would be too much.

[@theotherohlourdespadua1131]

So the thing that is happening in Myanmar, Ethiopia, and Yemen are good because nobody cares about them?

[@durranaik]

Please keep in mind anyone who dare throw a spanner into colonization wheel is termed a tyrant, fanatic, usurper of women rights etc.

[@MikusVilsons]

@@amirabdulazeez3241 Pablo Escobar was shot, not stepped down! 🤡 This should be the end for all narcos, and dictators!

[@mladenmatosevic4591]

NATO air power acted far more then "no fly" mandate, it worked as close air support to destroy Libyan army and pro Gaddafi militias. And particularly problematic was that attack came when Gaddafi bowed to pressure and paid reparations. It showed to world that concessions to West are sign of weakness and only increase chance to be attacked. Only strong Russian support saved Syria. North Korea, Iran and others took notice.

[@mirceazaharia2094]

Strength is the main (and often the only) argument that anyone can understand and respect.

[@TehAntares]

That explains the current mentality of the west-opposing countries. With this precedent established, a much stronger polarization of global economy, foreign relations, and military power is expected to rise up progressively.

[@MuantanamoMobile]

@@mirceazaharia2094 I'd go further and say that being able to quickly and effectively respond with unpredictable violence backed by strength when we arrogantly and hypocritically violate agreements, international conventions and laws we self righteously claim to uphold, is the only argument we can respect. Iran has done it when it hijacks our ships in retaliation for example.

[@MuantanamoMobile]

@@TehAntares A lot of countries were willing to play ball, even North Korea was going to fall in line after Libya turned in the dregs of its nascent fledgling nuclear program so as to be accepted into the "International" fold. Iran was already further along in this process. After Muammar was rapidly turned on and betrayed by his "buddies" like Nicholas Sachozy whose re-election he fully funded, which subsequently led to to his death, and the whole scale looting and destruction of his country. They all realized that having any honest and straight forward dealing with this block was not feasible. It was followed by the unilateral pull out from the JCPOA signed with Iran by Trump, and re-imposing of sanctions even after they fulfilled all their obligations. I put international in quotes, because in our eyes the west which makes up less than 7% of the worlds population. This sliver is what counts as international, when we say International community because to us, we arrogantly believe it's the only one that matters, a view mot shared by most of the other 93%.

[@giselameunier4788]

Russia with justice agaist criminal West and US

[@kdennis9115]

How is the Russia /Ukraine conflict differs from the hosting of Gaddafi by the US led NAtTO forces? It is very sad to see how they have plunged Lybia into chaos that now exists.

[@ketelin4285]

@@alejrodr Uninvited troops in Syria ...

[@Extra-dg7uv]

The difference is that Gaddafi wasn't a Nazi and Zelensky is

[@FOLIPE]

One in a long list of western political interventions which led to problems for locals and for the west, albeit to different levels. Yet, no apologies from the west, and much less protection or responsible help from them.

[@febarevo3716]

I bet 99% that you support ruzzia in the war against Ukraine.

[@FOLIPE]

@@febarevo3716 I don't support Russia invading Ukraine as I wouldn't have supported the US invading Iraq at the time

[@srb1855]

I would still love to understand why the "international community" backed the muslim brotherhood in this story. It would also be interesting to hear your take on Khalifa Haftar who apparently spent quite a bit of time in the US before returning to Libya.

[@skp8748]

Because they're a political group that govern not a war lord like Haftar who intends to be a looting dictator. What on earth does him spending time in the US have to do with anything.

[@artman12]

The “international community” aka “US and EU” has a long history of supporting radicals in the region, thinking they will support them only to backfire spectacularly after some time.

[@skp8748]

Haftar is a terrorist war lord whereas MB is a political organisation. Not that had

[@srb1855]

@@skp8748 I don't remember asking your opinion. The question was directed to the author. BTW, learn how to spell.

[@skp8748]

@@srb1855 oh Haftar spent time in the US... that's a good reason he should become the tyrannical ruler of a nation 😂.

[@SouthernGirl999]

"We firmly believe that NATO intervention in Libya led to the most devastating consequences. It destroyed the Libyan statehood, provoked the growth of terrorism and migration crisis. This should serve as a stark reminder of the real cost of 'regime-change' policies." Russian Embassy

[@Trofusky]

When he said "ALL this" I felt that

[@ItssMrT]

I’m from Libya , lived here before the Revolution aka western destabilization of the countries that do not serve there political and economical interests, it’s not about human rights if it was , Yemen crisis would not exist, Gadafi I was not good But 100% better than now We all Regret losing him , we got deceived by the claims of freedom, democracy, liberty... now we understand that the west uses human rights as a reason to invade - change the government

[@Muhammad_Ahmad_]

This should serve as a lesson to those wishing to see Putin ousted or Russia disintegrating. The worst thing is a nuclear armed state plunging into uncertain chaos.

[@Loveabove-z4r]

this crosses my mind often...

[@Юплвщлалвлвл]

не дождётесь! Путин это то,кто поднял страну после предателя,английского агента Горбачева и после алкаша Ельцина..народ всегда помнит то,что Путин сделал для страны.

[@Kuricang31]

You basically describing the current situation of Pakistan

[@roddychristodoulou9111]

For the west Libya has been a total and utter disaster . Events on the ground and what's happening right now in Libya prove this . What's even more bizarre is that western leaders knew exactly the outcome but still went ahead with this disastrous policy . Libya today has become a staging post for people smugglers bringing migrants into Europe , it's become a failed state with the country effectively split into 3 regions . The civil war looks endless and now with Russia , Turkiye , America and others firmly entrenched in Libya there is no hope left .

[@salogenosse]

It was the goal of the US to shut down the free international market and occupy Europe economically and politically. The US and NATO are occupiers, greedy dictators and terrorist organizations.

[@Ozzie786-m9z]

How can we be sure that these countries are promoting the mess so they can steal Libyan oil. These nations are thives especially the Western ones. America is stealing Syrian oil right now, shameless.

[@alextabet9247]

This was an unmitigated catastrophe. A clear case of Western powers acting with shameless impunity. NATO overreached and became a belligerent entity well beyond its own borders, when it’s charter clearly only allows it to act defensively within the borders of member states only, which in turn has given China and Russia the justification to conduct military operations where and when they see fit. Bravo!

[@Sameer2107]

I have heard Libyans liked him...he did good for the nation... libyans please comment..i would like to know more about him

[@vencentjansen]

I am from Libya and I tell you that Gaddafi ruled with a socialist economic system This is what made the Libyan people hate Gaddafi Gaddafi was also hostile to the policies of Western countries, which caused the imposition of economic sanctions on Libya All these reasons made the Libyan people hate Muammar Gaddafi Because the people paid the price for Gaddafi's policy But after his death we knew that everything he did was for the Arabs and for the Africans and we also knew that the dirtiest people in the world are Westerners Because they deceive people in the name of democracy and create crises everywhere for their personal interests Simply put, we have been deceived by the West. And for this reason you will notice that the Arabs support Russia in the Ukraine war right now

[@aymenswisy4969]

It's divided to say the least, and maybe right down the middle if i'm being fair, but in my opinion as a Libyan, he was far from good, the stability was to serve his interests while no one of the people can advance financialy, only if you belong to the closer circles " his tribe and the subservient ones"

[@Bibirallie]

Yes, far better than where they are today.

[@jb2736]

All of Africa love Gaddafi, he helped and shared his wealth among the African continent.

[@pavlarasts]

Thank you for this video Professor! The Libyan situation is in many ways an extension of the broader repercussions of the Arab Spring, which held much hope for millions who lived under repressive authoritarian regimes across the Arab world, including Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria, Bahrain, Syria etc. However, what followed was decimation of law and order and civil society, along with the state apparatus in many of these countries, either leading to, or resulting in civil wars that are now longstanding disputes between factional warlords. I think it tends to indicate that it is very difficult for societies who are conditioned under authoritarian rule often do not know how to transition effectively to democratic structures and principles. The former Soviet Union is also a good example of this, with many of the 15 former republics ending up with strong autocratic rulers emerging as a way of keeping those countries stable. Stability is the key here. Has the west been foolish I’m pursuing its anti-authoritarian agenda? Sometimes yes, because those regimes were the glue holding those countries and societies together. Is that stability and cohesion important? Depends on your perspective, I guess, but surely the lives of the people of Iraq, Syria, Libya etc are immeasurably worse as a result of western intervention in each of those cases, even if the likes of Saddam, Gaddafi are gone.

[@Avengerie]

The Western anti-authoritarian agenda would have more credibility if they haven’t been backing countries, where, until very recently, women were not allowed to drive and “witches” get beheaded on the streets. As Abramovich was being forced to sell Chelsea FC, Mohammed bin Salman closed the deal to buy Newcastle United. Yes, the guy who had his critic dismembered in the Saudi Embassy in Turkey. That guy. Which is why “third world” countries acted the way they did when the Ukraine war started. They know all too well what it’s like to be on the receiving end of the “Western anti-authoritarian agenda”.

[@destroyerarmor2846]

Democracy doesn't work in tribal Africa. It's always one group trying to dominate or wipe out the other. The Arab spring was a joke

[@blackagent4754]

The problem is that the west keeps trying to invade and force democracy and westernization onto these people in these countries rather than leaving them be. Haven't you thought that maybe many people don't know how to transition to democracy because they don't WANT to? Maybe they wanted to keep their traditions and cultures and refused democracy being forced into them which would then erode their way of life they're used to. But, as usual, the west keeps believing in freedom and democracy but also trying to go and spread it by force and failing repeatedly because many western people refuse to accept that it doesn't work for everyone else and that not everyone wants it. Just because you say they're repressive authoritarian regimes doesn't mean the people there would all automatically agree for democracy.

[@Extra-dg7uv]

I'm not an evangelist for Western military intervention, but I think its deeply naive to accept that brutal corrupt dictatorships such as those that dominate the Arab world are a source of long-term stability. Corrupt, repressive regimes based on patronage such as these tend to create the kind of roiling resentment that then explodes in something like the Arab Spring. Much like how the brutality and corruption of the Bourbon regime in France created an eruption in 1789. Mark my words, we will get another Arab Spring in the years to come. And it will make the last one look like a picnic. And that will happen with or without Western intervention

[@Extra-dg7uv]

The ancien regimes of Europe tried to put the genie of revolutionary fervour back in the bottle in 1815 but restoring the Bourbon monarchy, only for the cork to come off just 15 years later in 1830, and then again in 1848. It seems almost certain that today's ancien regimes in the Arab world will face the same rude awakening in the near future.

[@captainrump2788]

Love ya professor, please keep doing this work!

[@Daniel_Lav]

Finally. I was waiting for this so long. Thank you

[@BarriosGroupie]

For me, it's a lesson in how difficult it is for secular democracy to develop in parts of the world where there isn't a strong history leading to its creation, providing firm cultural foundations and a sense of regional identity. I vaguely recall that Gaddafi and Sadam Hussein warned the West about the need to rule the regions with an iron fist to prevent political religious groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood forming there. We now have Afghanistan and the Taliban slowly turning back the clock. On a positive note, change will inevitable take place, but not necessarily at the pace others elsewhere in the world want to see.

[@DailyLifeSolution]

Unless you challenge Islam and put it on backfoot, arabastan won't change for good. Social change towards individualism is necessary for lasting political stability.

[@vegas5706]

Thank you for your unique work.

[@gregcampwriter]

"He's a *posterior orifice*, but he's our *posterior orifice*" always sounds like good policy to the realpolitik types, but it leaves problems festering.

[@AL-lh2ht]

Same people who would argue hitler was just misunderstood.

[@MuantanamoMobile]

I believe there are different varieties of realpolitik. The pure realist type that exemplified the likes of Otto von Bismarck is long dead, the progressively watered down ones championed by Henry Kissinger and subsequently George F. Kennan, are also barely holding only and will likely vanish when the vault of millions of harvested souls that has been fuelling Kissinger finally runs empty. What is prevalent now is the Robert Kagan/Victyoria Nuland brand, which is a derivative of the Ideology infused one pushed by Zbigniew Brzezinski, were certain sacred cows are arrogantly pushed to the detriment of all else. Even when hypocrisies and contradictions arise in the course of said ideological crusades.

[@Larzh220469]

In hindsight, it may not have been a wise decision. But the intervention in Libya had a UNSC mandate and was thus technically legal under international law. In that sense, it is qualitatively different from the 1999 bombing of Serbia or the 2003 US invasion of Iraq. On a side note, if I remember correctly, the actual military intervention was initiated by certain NATO countries lead by the France. NATO as an organisation became involved later.

[@AL-lh2ht]

Man European’s level of cope is off the charts.

[@kiro9257]

@@AL-lh2htHe’s correct though. It was a legal intervention since it came from the UN. However, it was not a morally sound-decision. Furthermore, France did initiated the bombings, whereas NATO intervention came later. I’d like to add that UAE and Qatar also joined in the bombings.

[@AlexGreat87]

no it was not; the UN only passed a no-fly zone, and the mandate wasn't established until November, the bombings (SUPER illegal) were in March

[@joshuakathenya2684]

Its dint come from tge un wtf

[@AlexGreat87]

@@kiro9257 he is not, the bombings were illegal under international law; the UN resolution was of a no-fly zone, and the mandate wasn't established until much later; there is plenty of breaking international law here, and the absolute inability of the UN to enforce it

[@edwardspan396]

He was tortured to death, he wasn’t executed in some organized way. The question of whether or not he should have been leading wasn’t a question of DCs either way.

[@MoonLight-xo3yi]

I'm Libyan and we will not forget and we will not forgive what western world did to us and libya is recovering in now days and as a Libyans we live better than a lot of other countries so don't believe the western media

[@حيدراياد-م3ك]

انتم الشعب الليبي قمتوا بالثوره وقتلتوا القذافي 😂

[@TheMask123]

@@حيدراياد-م3ك كلامك صح بس الأطراف الخارجية ساعدت الثورة والمتمردين بشكل كبير

[@MoonLight-xo3yi]

@@حيدراياد-م3ك لم نقم بالثورة بل بعض الخونة والعملاء ثم ان القذافي رحمه الله من قام باسقاطه هو هجوم مكون من ٤٨ دولة صلبية نووية وقومهم ثمانية اشهر ثم توفى شهيدا عند ربه ليس مثل حكامك الجبناء المنبطحين للغرب

[@tastyDungeon]

Bad things have happened. Wish you peace and a clear consciousness above the anger you feel for the west.

[@kyleinthought]

Gadaffi’s death must have been quite a wake up call to similar leaders the world over, and I doubt it helped the west to deal with them in the future.

[@jjd6137]

Spot on.

[@雷-t3j]

yeah. If only they realised that the way to not get your head chopped off by angry rebels is to not anger those rebels in the first place.

[@Bigwillystyle707]

​@@雷-t3jthere are rebels in Nigeria you point being?

[@m.rabeetkhan6402]

Like what similar leaders? Khamenei, Kim Jong Un, Maduro, Lukashenko or Putin?

[@jaymudd2817]

Death of Diem in 1964, could be seen as the same.

[@kaeso101]

Gaddafi taking power at age 27 is one of four instances of a young person doing somethimg extraordinarily i personally find fascinating. The other three instances are Albert Einstein's miracle papers of 1906 which he did at age 26. The second is Mike Tyson becoming boxing world heavyweight champion in 1986 age 19 and the third being Dwayne The Rock Johnson achieving pro wrestling success in 1998 at age 26... all these instances are incredibly hard to achieve and would take until one's in at least their 30s or later to do.

[@timor64]

How about 2 guys called Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs founding a personal computer company when aged 21 years old, which was selling millions of units by the time they were 28, and then went on to become the world's biggest company?

[@mikenogozones]

Thanks for the informative video, I have yet to do any filming in Libya but it's definitely on my to do list. As someone that has filmed in Iraq and I have seen the major difficulties of overthrowing a long time dictator. Was Gaddafi a despot and an authoritarian, absolutely but it's far better to have the strong armed dictator than constant civil war.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks. This is really the question. There are of course those who refuse to accept that role like Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein were brutal dictators. But for most observers it does come down to the lesser of two evils. As awful as they were, was it better to try to take steps to limit their threat to international peace and security, but Allie then to remain in power, or remove them at the risk of civil war. In the case of Syria it was a war that even saw the leader remain in power!

[@dsm5d723]

@@JamesKerLindsay Do you try to offer incentives and work with such leaders to reduce their threat to international security and peace or do you decide in your situation room in DC who is to be the puppet and what they are to do? Russia and the Taliban come to mind. Lest we have any doubts, the Victoria Nuland-Jeffery Pyatt leaked Ukraine phone call shows how this is approached. Hillary was more brazen about Libya, and on the air no less. The gold African dinar was the real motivation. You don't have to steal foreign reserves when you can just invade and take the gold. IIRC they took the gold in Afghanistan too. Had Gaddafi had BRICS+ to work with, . . .

[@salogenosse]

It was the original goal of the US to shut down the free international market and occupy Europe and Asia economically and politically. The US and NATO are occupiers, greedy dictators and terrorist organizations, staged 90% of all wars since the end of WWII. There's how it works.

[@jarsoabdulkadir7801]

​@@JamesKerLindsayYou only ask the questions in terms of what the benefits and costs of intervention are. You don't question the legality of NATO and American invasions. Are you an imperialist?

[@khalfara]

​@@jarsoabdulkadir7801of course obviously he is!! 🤬

[@explore.365]

Thank you for an informed view. Appreciative

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you very much!

[@TSEEMOD_618]

3:55 as Italian, I would like to add Fascist Italian Regime with Graziani committed a genocide in Libya. Relevant thing to be necessarily added, because nobody talks about that in Italy at all 5:48 my uncle and his family were expelled as well To be added: Italy during Berlusconi era, in early 2000s, stipulated advantageous oil deals with Tamoil, the Libyan company, and some other building projects. Italy paid some Billions of Euro (to be taken off from such deal) as reparation for such genocide. It also stroke some deals for Migrants to be stopped. If you add all into the mix you can see why Italy fucked up badly by sustaining this intervention, as it screwed a tons of lucrative deals, from Oil, to infrastructure, to halt Migrants to arrive

[@tariqalmukhtar6595]

I am from Libya and I am really happy that someone from Italy is rasing the awareness about the forgotten genocide that happened in cyrinica (east Libya). I agree with you that Italy was the most negatively affected EU Country from the NATO intevention in Libya. I hope Italy start to play a better role to help stablizing the country.

[@andrewsarantakes639]

Thanks for your balanced academic assessment of such a complex situation

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you so much, Andrew. I hope all is well at your end.

[@andrewsarantakes639]

Staying busy here in Korea. Thanks for your truly measured assessments. It is without a doubt, that everyone benefits from the excellent content you provide. The historical backgrounds involved with the current political events are great in describing highly complex situations.👍

[@toagonel7045]

Actually been thinking about this a lot lately. Cant wait to watch!

[@williamlloyd3769]

Muammar Gaddafi spent years tearing down any structure that could act as a means of governing the country. Additionally all the outside governmental and terrorist forces jumping into fray just tore Libya apart.

[@kiro9257]

Exactly. It didn’t helped when he started massacring protesters.

[@victormarian7889]

You could'nt be more right, that was a terribly police state, with absolutelly no respect for local or systematicall governing, for the average people life was a hell, but after the intervention the deep division and the tribal mentality back - fired against that country, and the scavengers quickly rushed to even worsening the situation.

[@firasajoury7813]

@@victormarian7889not quite

[@Avengerie]

⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠​⁠@@victormarian7889as always, the myth of “poor innocent people” and the “scavengers and usurpers” who hold them down. Libya has never been anything other than post-colonial tribal territory held together by a strongman. When you remove the strongman, you get tribal warfare.

[@Threezi04]

Exactly he made himself the state and made the entire country dependent on him alone

[@raskltube]

this is one of my favourite channels at the moment!

[@aarongebreslasie7677]

Great content as usual! Would you be willing to do a video about Eritrea`s dictatorship?

[@n.m6249]

I'd love that as well, I'm from South Africa but can't get enough information on Eritrea dictatorship

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks. This has been on my list for ages. I will try to do something on it.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

@n.m6249 Keep an eye out over the next of weeks. I’m planning to do a video on SA. But it’ll be a little different from my usual ones. More historical in approach. But tackling a fascinating question in international relations.

[@n.m6249]

@@JamesKerLindsay awesome, it's definitely interesting times in South Africa with this BRICSA meeting, tensions from the West about Russia-China relationship. Never thought the Russia-Ukraine war would drag Africa this far. I look forward to your presentation. Thank you for your great work 🙏🏾

[@paxdriver]

I've been waiting for this video for a long time, thank you much!

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks. I had wanted to make it for ages. Libya is such an interesting country and this raises so many important questions.

[@paxdriver]

@@JamesKerLindsay Is there an Angola or Uganda issue coming up by any chance? I feel woefully uneducated about African countries' histories, economies and politics.

[@jmxtra]

I'm looking at this in the context of the fight between resources between the West. Russia and China for access and control of African resources. Can you imagine unified Africa, initially on a regional level, that have control of its resources; an economy that works for its people, to provide for their own sustenance and national/regional security, etc. But, we live in a very wicked world; unfortunately the masses are manipulated and misused and powerless.

[@amandacharity32]

Very sad some Libyans celebrated Gaddafi's Death; it is a shame the once rich country is now History and needy. Africans we never Learn :(

[@Chris-il7mi]

Its ironic how the UN resolution against Gaddafi was mentioned but UN resolution 242 against Israel is not. Only 10 NATO members approved the attack on Libya so what happened to the other 20?

[@sucramyalcin]

The video was indeed useful. Thanks for the effort.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you very much!

[@coolyoutubechannel5891]

Everyone in Libya was so on board with NATOs involvement. It's only now in hind sight. My Libyan friends all admit this.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

This is very true. But, looking back, do they also all feel it was worth nine years of civil war?

[@Kattan19929]

I opposed the libya war in 2011.

[@master-x7283]

sure everyone was on board, because they have done their 'disfiguring' gaddafi assignment very well first. and the people thought they would get Miraculous high-end "Democracy" from the west. they trust the west and they went from 'living in heaven' to .. well you know the rest.

[@Avengerie]

If “everyone was on board”, you wouldn’t need NATO. Conversely, we were led to believe that nobody was on board with ISIS, and they captured half of Iraq and Syria in 6 months. Makes you think…

[@Threezi04]

Yep my dad and his family all supported it, now they wish it didn't happen (they still don't like Gaddafi tho they just realised he was the better alternative)

[@Julia-Richter]

Thanks, I was waiting for this.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks, Julia. I had been meaning to tackle Libya for absolutely ages!

[@Julia-Richter]

@@JamesKerLindsay Libya is subject to a lot of propaganda, so I wanted to be reminded of the facts. You were doing my homework😏. I will make a donation to your channel per paypal.

[@TheLocalLt]

Thank you for taking a look at this professor, I can’t emphasize enough that your rundown of the full “modern” (in civilizational terms) history of the area in question really gives color and context to the situations that exist today, especially for a country with as rich and storied a history as Libya. From my lay man’s position, my current view on this, which has nonetheless evolved continuously over time as I’ve accumulated more research, is that ultimately the failure of NATO in Libya was caused by a lack of diplomatic preparation and vision (mainly by policymakers rather than civil service), on behalf of both the Western European powers and the United States, for dealing with all of the different factions that might need to be appeased to hold a post-war government together, as well as lacking a clear vision of what such a government would look like and how to bring it about. Essentially the West was trying to avoid getting its hands dirty in Libya’s internal politics, even though they had already done so by providing air support to the rebels. I don’t want to directly compare this situation to others because they are all truly so unique, but this problem has seemingly cropped up, to different degrees, in some of those other recent situations as well. The current situation in Libya for the last year or so is actually quite odd. After two years of unity government, the east broke away again and formed yet another breakaway regime, but despite a few early clashes there doesn’t actually appear to have been much fighting. So you now have two rival Libyan governments in place, one based in Tripoli and one controlling most of Cyrenaica, but without an actual war. Important to note that over the centuries of history, the country has been repeatedly split into its component units of Cyrenaica and Tripolitania, only to later be reunited again. Perhaps this is an indication of what direction a potential lasting settlement might need to go in. Alright, that’s enough from me as an outsider, thanks as always Dr. Ker Lindsay for your expert perspective and for providing a neutral basis for discussion.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks so much LocalLt. I had wanted to make a video on Libya for a very long time. It was another one of those complex situations that was in the news so much at one time, and yet now gets very little coverage. As you said, the situation remains fragile. There’s no fighting, but equally there’s no real peace. I’d really like to follow up on the situation.

[@salogenosse]

It was the goal of the US to shut down the free international market and occupy Europe economically and politically. The US and NATO are occupiers, greedy dictators and terrorist organizations, staged 90% of all wars since the end of WWII.

[@maunzee]

For us Alkebulan our Fond brother Gaddafi was the hope for a bright future, the unity (one currency & no borders-the main reason for his extermination) and free ticket for our freedom from the West’s mental and economic slavery. Like any other human being, he wasn’t perfect mind you the way he lead his own country to prosperity was impeccable.

[@asnekboi7232]

Because the gold standard worked so well in the West

[@julienferretti3872]

Dear professor, very nice video and a super interesting topic. However, I feel like Italy is always forgotten when explaining situations like the Libyan one. Italy was and still is the main trading partner of Libya (import & export). It built infrastructure, ENI was and still is the main oil extractor and refiner, thus I believe that this youtube video lacks further deepenings. Overall is still a nice and interesting video.

[@RobespierreThePoof]

Its not clear what you are implying Italy's involvement in the Libyan war might have been

[@haroonsuresh2326]

Should give more highlight on the background music. Hope you'll work on it next time.

[@mersadbesic7083]

What people don't know is, Libya not only owe oil and gas, they also have enormous water resources. This was another reason to overthrow Gaddafi, who was trying to connect Africa with water pipe-lines, which would have been a step forward for the entire continent and an African Union that Gaddafi was always talking about. The West didn't want that. And those African countries that wanted to mediate in this crisis were banned and threatened with sanctions. This is the West. Disgusting!

[@ngiagee1467]

A very informative video. Thank you sir.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you very much indeed!

[@polyglot8]

Very good and thorough presentation, as always. However, you missed a key player in this saga. From the beginning, the cheerleader-in-chief for this ill-fated project was Bernard-Henri Lévy, which is mainly why the effort was initiated by France.

[@goldreserve]

Poorly researched and missing key facts (assuming what I read is true). Libya under Gaddafi had no income tax, free healthcare, free education, no homelessnes, subsidized utilities and energy, food welfare etc. Also not a true dictatorship. Gaddafi started selling oil outside the US petrodollar system, which is the main reason he was killed.

[@polyglot8]

@@goldreserve There are a lot of things like that, but if you talk about it, you're a conspiracy theorist. For example, I was living in Saudi Arabia before and during the Gulf War. The (American) guy in the office next to mine was the rep. from Haliburton, just as I was the rep. for my American company. By coincidence, we shared the same Saudi agent/importer and therefore worked out of the same building. He and I were friends, and one day, several months before the Gulf War, he showed me the diagrams for Haliburton's horizontal drilling equipment. He told me that Kuwait was using the equipment at the Rumaila Oil Field - which straddled the border - to suck oil out from underneath the Iraqi side of the border: which was one of Saddam Hussein's chief complaints against Kuwait. And Saddam Hussein was 100% correct.

[@jainepal4844]

Saddam had approval from American s to invade Kuwait,next min,the ambassador's daughter cries at UN assembly as she recounts how Iraqi soldíers ripped babies out of incubators,whilst claiming to be a Kuwaiti nurse,,the media,all part of the same ,,how can anyone take any of the western controlled institutions or reports seriously,same with Syrian chemical attacks,weapons of mass destruction etc etç..

[@georgegagic9874]

I always like your presentations which are very interesting. I need to say that you need to read Gaddafi's little green book ( I am translating it). Its not religious at all its more a red book ( a socialist book). Gadafi was close to Tito and had a good position in the Non - Alignment movement. A correction concerning his Little Green Book as its not religious at all feel free to read it. Similar to Mugabe with Oil and Gas reserves. A lot of work for workers from Socialist countries in the 80's.

[@BlaBlaBlaInDaHouse]

As always, a very insightful and balanced video! Thank you for your content 😊

[@apollossemakula50]

Uganda Africa We Love You, Thanks For The Good Information

[@jimmystone]

Nice video. I guess clearly it was a mistake because from once a flourishing country to a disastrous one can't be good for anyone. Sad that more powerful countries can destroy a small flourishing one. 😢

[@GabrielDavou-f4b]

I love your analyses. You do this without western sentiment

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you so much. I try. But I am sure many would disagree. :-)

[@thangzadal5850]

Dear Prof. Ker-Lindsay, I was impressed by your fair and informative analysis of the communal crisis in Manipur State in India some months ago. Now, I find your analysis of this complex issue concise yet informative and fair. Thank you very much.

[@malcolmvivian1969]

I was surprised that you neglected to mention Gaddafi’s plans to introduce a new currency to rival the dollar, the gold Dinar to be used as medium of exchange between AU states, as a reason, if not the reason, behind the West’s backing of his overthrow.

[@雷-t3j]

Because noone cared about that, except people who want to blame Africa's, especially South Africa's, problems entirely on the "west" so the people remain loyal to a corrupt and incompetent regime.

[@RoryT1000]

Don't be surprised, that issue cuts too close to the bone. JKL has always avoided those questions and mainly repeats mainstream IR discussion. Not great but not terrible either it is what it is

[@AmericanDiscord]

Yeah, he's another bought and paid for mouth piece that leaves all the important details out, intentionally.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks. I hear this, but I have to say that it sits at the fringe end of the theories. I wouldn't put too much credence on this. I really can't see Western policymakers sitting around a table plotting to oust Gaddafi because he has another of his quixotic ideas about creating a single currency for a continent that has proven to be remarkably resistant to integration! Besides, don't forget that Western policy was at first rather divided on intervention Britain and France wanted to. Germany and the US didn't.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

@Dgoosh1000 I don't cover things that don't make sense! Seriously, anyone can come up with some conspiracy theory that superficially sounds plausible. But this idea falls apart with even the most cursory analysis shows. Seriously, I've been doing this too long to indulge in this type of thinking. And frankly, there are too many channels out there that are happy to peddle this sort of nonsense for clicks - if that's what you want. But I don't and won't.

[@thelovertunisia]

Even the notion of "should he be allowed to stay in power" is absurd and the "International community" does not exist, it is just the West! I studied International Relations myself Sir.

[@zurielsss]

You are blaming the results of the Arab spring in the West, when it’s roots are on the corrupted bureaucracy of the Arab nations. The West reacted to the revolution, they didn’t instigated it

[@ezenwankwoekene8273]

@@zurielsss who is the West to react to the revolution? Do other regions meddle in their own affairs?

[@thelovertunisia]

@@zurielsss Corrupted bureaucracies are the same in the west, just look at the EU what is that? A bureaucratic superstate with normative obsessions. Von Der Leyen is as corrupt as any Arab dictator or more.

[@zurielsss]

@@ezenwankwoekene8273 all the fking time. China and Russia pays millions to lobbying agents to their interests in Western countries. China themselves supported a coup in Myanmar recently and the junta overthrow the democratically elected govt. Russia annexed regions from Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine in wars. African countries support various sides of each other’s civil wars according to their interests. Libya is an example already.

[@ezenwankwoekene8273]

@@zurielsss I asked if other regions meddle in western affairs not in the affairs of countries close to them. I don't remember Libya being close to America or England as it were.

[@Ricky_Baldy]

Once again, I'm compelled by notification on a Friday evening to watch your latest video. It's becoming quite an inconvenient compulsion. 😅😂

[@CeyloKnight]

What some people don`t get is that some cultures need dictators to rule.

[@yaoliang1580]

The last thing they need is foreign dictators

[@walidshabazz5193]

Gaddafi was a divine messenger, an excellent leader and brilliant statesman. Rest in peace my elder.

[@itemushmush]

Have you done a deep dive into the Arab Spring? I was totally on their side at the time, but the law of unintended consequences...

[@durranaik]

Arab Spring,? The recyclable dope from So$$o$ mass protest manual 😁

[@Bread_Butter]

A very good discourse; as usual balanced and factual.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you so much.

[@MarkVrem]

Something you got to take a step back to take 2 steps forward. Maybe Cyrennica and Tripoli do need to just break up. Then figure it out from there.

[@LorenzoTHughes]

Great content. Very informative.

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you very much indeed!

[@master-x7283]

Nice video sir... just one note, Libya was not one of the wealthiest countries in Africa, Rather It was one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Libya under Gaddafi used to have a higher GDP per capita than the EU.

[@yoloswaggins7121]

Lol that is not true

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks. It was wealthy from oil. But it had relatively little other economic activity. So, I’m pretty sure it wasn’t wealthier than the EU. But I’m happy to be proved wrong.

[@itsaboutwhatsfair1532]

You are sooo knowledgeable professor ❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@CCamilleri1982]

Gaddafi was a harsh dictator but he had united the Libyan tribes. He also did many good things for Libyans including providing a social welfare program while maintaining a good economy. As long as you were not an opponent to his regime, Libya was a much better place to live in during his time when compared to Libya of today. On another matter, I believe that same as Libya, chaos would have also took over if Assad was overthrown in Syria. Assad is lucky that Syria does not have oil. If he had, he would have surely been overthrown by Western powers and local rebels.

[@kenirawadi4689]

Assad is lucky because of Russian's help. Therefore, the west want to hurt Russia now.

[@gtr5860]

Syria still in chaos.. Russian still active bombing the rebels.. plus ISIS

[@susanmaddison5947]

I’m glad you raise the question, but unfortunately, like most commentators and critics, you ask only the general question, and neglect to mention the two really crucial mistakes: 1. The decision of Obama and allies to ignore the request of the moderate Provisional National Council/Government for the NATO forces to stay and help it restore order in Libya. Acting favorably on this request would have been a normal status quo option, and would have comported with the norms of international law and responsibility. The Obama Administration was against this, as were some allies. Its motivations were so fundamental it didn't need to restate them formally for this instance. And its motivations were logical, given its assumptions: a. The Administration was doctrinally against American or Western power determining outcomes in countries. Obama did later formally state this doctrine in his press conference in Turkey, when Western media pressed him on the question of why he was seemingly trying not to win in the war against ISIS. The moral orientation behind this doctrine has never been examined; commentators have been too ready to accept at face value his superficial explanation that he believed it was only counterproductive when American power determined an outcome. Why did he believe such an a-logical thing, as if it were always better for other actors to determine an outcome of a chaotic situation, and somehow other, better ones would always appear in time? It indicates a doctrinaire moral attitude, orientation, or ideology, not a genuinely pragmatic one. Real analysis would start with identifying that ideology. b. The Administration had decided regarding the whole Arab world that the Islamists would be and ought to be the future there, after the Arab Spring, with our support, overthrew the non-Islamists governments. The PNC was too moderate from that standpoint, and the Islamists militias were the future. Ergo, the militias must be appeased, not brought under PNC control with Western help. That same reasoning was the real explanation, subsequently, for Obama's cryptic statement, after the killing of American diplomats in Benghazi, that fighting back against the Islamist militias would only have made things worse in Libya. Given his assumption that they were supposed to inherit Libya, that was logical: fighting back would have meant making worse enemies of the necessary and proper future power. Why he and his people made that assumption is the significant problem. This again raises uncomfortable questions about what actually was their basic moral orientation when making U.S. foreign policy. 2. Earlier, after the decision to intervene had been taken and Qaddafi finally realized that he had lost, the West refused to bargain with Qaddafi and his people for their (relatively) peaceful exit from Libya with immunity, and a transition of power. It argued that this would be "unprincipled", since the ICC was set to go against him; that Qaddafi already had his chance to bargain and leave so why bother to try again when he might finally have agreed to do so and just happened to be ready to talk; and that we must instead proceed with his prosecution through the ICC. The ICC was seen as a new moral tool that we positively want to use, and not compromise over it in the way that international diplomacy had always previously compromised to get more peaceful outcomes. More sarcastically, there was a mentality of having it as a new toy and wanting to play with it. No one knows whether the bargain could have been reached. But we do know that our guys had become too sanctimonious to explore the possibility at the one moment when it was real. This second mentality is very much present today again, in those who would be willing to give up Ukrainian territory to Putin in return for peace, but refuse to contemplate giving up on prosecuting Putin while keeping more territory for Ukraine. The spirit of personal revenge and false principle is again overpowering real interests, real principles, elementary reasoning, and the normal skills of the diplomatic tradition.

[@Klausemann66]

Interesting video and conclusion Thanx @JamesKerLindsay Do you know more about Gadhafi's attempts to strengthen pan-african cooperation and how this was perceived by western nations, esp. former colonial powers?

[@雷-t3j]

I think this is played a tiny role compared to the far longer history of terrorism and belligerence. But whatever the west thought, if LIBYANS hadn't risen against him at all then nothing would've happened. But a lot of commentators love blaming the west for all of Africa's problems, especially those governments that have deteriorated everything in the last 2 decades and need foreign powers to blame in certain parts of Africa, so they act like the small amount of lip service Gaddafi payed to African cooperation could've made everyone rich and powerful in Africa on the extreme other side of the continent.

[@1234Mwafrika]

Why should some people think they know more than others? They killed Gaddafi because he challenged them. Long live the Gaddafi philosophy of a United Africa.

[@iTZzEroK]

I cannot imagine how long the video took from you to show us this ideal. Anyone who started the video not knowing anything about the Libyan crisis, and thanks to you, within 13 minutes, he has a complete picture of it, as if he had read a book about it. And big thanks to you Professor for the Arabic translation . Best Regards from Saudi Arabia

[@YeenMage]

The Western countries interfering in Libya cause the country to become Yugoslavia 2.0. Ethnic clash Gadhafi might be a brutal dictator, but Libya flourished and was like what the UAE is now - free electricity and stuff. By killing 1 Gadhafi and you got 3 more, if not 100, Gadhafis in Libya now.

[@АртурКарапетян-и2э]

Well, UAE is not a good example for comparisions, because their economy is run by slave labor

[@joqqeman]

He was well on his way out of power before anyone intervened

[@ronald3836]

@@joqqeman Any idea if he could have done an Assad? Ask Putin for help?

[@Brendissimo1]

You're assuming Gaddafi would have quickly defeated rebels without Western bombing. Don't be so sure. Libya could have easily become another Syria. The outcomes for Arab Spring are not pretty.

[@AL-lh2ht]

How racist do you have to be to think so little of Libya you will declare up and down that this was not a multi faction civil war over getting rid of someone who was literally insane.

[@tigerscott2966]

Great video...thanks

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you so much!

[@TheRealMRGG85]

It's crazy that you can make a video about Libya and not even mention the fact that he planned on going off the dollar standard and back to the gold standard for oil

[@mustang2440]

Same with Saddam Hussein in Iraq who made the same mistake challenging the US$ by asking that Iraqi oil be paid for in Euros.

[@lekernous]

Now the games will change. Killing Mr Gaddafi just spread the ant-imperalism to Africa country. Now Western needs to deal with BRICS. Wellcome to New World Order 🌎 📈📉💰⚖️.

[@Frostchris4121]

To address the title of the video, what the west did in Libya was obviously an intentional act of imperialism. Let's consider some economic facts; Before Gaddafi was killed, Libya's foreign debt to institutions like the IMF was basically zero. In fact they actually gave loans to other countries. Another interesting fact was that many of the western oil corporations that operate in Libya today weren't in the country during Gaddafi's rule. Libya's oil wealth was instead used to improve the standard of living of the people rather than enrich a few western oligarchs like it's the case today. All of these aside, the most important factor yet was Gaddafi's intention to introduce a gold backed currency that'll basically facilitate trade between African countries, making it a direct competitor to the US dollar. I don't expect (most)westerners or even western media to ever acknowledge their country's imperialism, they'll always try to use propaganda to cover their tracks and say that overthrowing foreign governments to steal their resources was because of democracy, even though western led institutions like the IMF and WB have basically given loans to a dictators in the past just like they did in my country. But of course you won't ever hear about how the IMF funded dictators in western corporate propaganda media. Ultimately when it comes down to it, you guys will never change. Once an imperialist, always an imperialist.

[@shafiyaalgiquadra1105]

Hear, hear!

[@Barone2013]

Terorrist designation is not universal, it is a political tool of those trying to assert their power. Ghaddafi was instrumental in the fight for independence across the whole of Africa, he sponsored the ANC of Nelson Mandela in South Africa as well, he also sponsored the fight in Ghana, Zambia, Zimbabwe and in many other states. Of course the western powers who wanted to keep full control of the colonies didn’t not like this. He was opposed to them, so they went after him. They tried to assasinate him several times. He refused allowing the western firms to come in and extract the resources except the Italians. The Italians were those who helped him escape 2 assasination attempts as he got tip offs. As always the Americans and British were out and about to kill anyone that opposed them. The US and NATO finally succeeded in destroying they country and plundering its resources as they always do. The Americans and Brit’s are ruthless, killing millions in distant lands while claiming freedom, human rights, democracy and pointing fingers. The Americans blamed and nailed Ghaddafi for the Panam bombing but there was not sufficient evidence for that. When they want you, they will find a reason to get you.

[@louvendran7273]

As always another gem, professor. What hurts me the most is the "so called Rules Based Order" implemented by the west in order to maintain a rules based liberal society. The contradictions to this policy are infinite & more importantly enshrines elitism. What I have learned over time is to follow the trail of money spent/stolen to affect change & then the beneficiaries of the profits of said change. In all instances thus, the general populace of these nations have become the biggest losers with the respective private elites benefitting the most. From my knowledge only 3 countries have been allowed to prosper however from a heavily conservative system. South Korea, strategic importance to Japan, North Korea & China. Japan potential threat to US hegemony & counter balance to China. Taiwan, just to stick it to China. All other non-OECD countries are just pawns in the game of predatory capitalism or isolationism.

[@AL-lh2ht]

This guy is complety insane. Even more he literally thinks the conflict was not a civil war. Even more racist where literally thinking it was because of “west” that Korea, japan, and Taiwan, are successful. Not, you know, decades and decades of their own extreme hard work. The racism here is off the charts.

[@雷-t3j]

ok. then why did China benefit by liberalising it's economy and international relations? Why did Italy and Germany? Why did Singapore become the richest country in the world with an actual population? Of course in an internationalised world undeveloped countries will have the option of simply selling resources and filling the presidents bank account. That's what most do. The fact they are undeveloped is because their leaders don't care about the people and do not invest in them, and if they don't work with the US to sell their resources, they'll work with someone else.

[@louvendran7273]

@@雷-t3j 1. Italy & Germany = Marshall Plan & communist threat. The Yanks realised a devastated Germany would be another ticking time bomb so they decided to rebuild West Germany economically to counter any communist threat or Nazi backlash. Italy was also communist leaning so the CIA got involved to 'sort things out'. The same policy applied to Greece. All Soviet Countries with the exception of Yugoslavia struggled to rebuild as they did not enjoy the benefits of funding from the Marshall Plan. Anyway the only true Soviet State (in spirit) that existed was Yugoslavia as Tito rightly gave ownership of resources and capital to the people. The Soviets had little capital compared to mighty US Empire which was the only major power to come out of the war unscathed but rather rejuvenated after the calamitous Great Depression. Moreover, the dollar surplanting the GBP as the international medium of exchange after Brettonwoods ensured economic dominance over any competitors. The Soviets stripped East Germany of whatever industry it had as punishment for the destruction caused by the Nazis. That ensured that East Germany would always play second fiddle to the larger, better developed West Germany which benefitted from Marshall Plan Funding. Most German industrial titans ran away to West Germany to reignite their financial fortunes comprising of a good few Nazi funders, members & sympathisers. Former Nazis were recruited by the CIA & West German government to counterbalance Communist threats as they were natural commie haters. With the Soviets being so harsh to the East Germans many ran away as economic migrants. After the death of Stalin, the Soviets realised they could not continue plundering East Germany as it was suffering economically compared to West Germany. Whatever they tried would never be able to resuscitate East Germany as they did not have the capital to spare nor the insight. 2. You question about China seems rather vague. I do recall the cultural revolution in China was not a big hit. Moreover, Deng was a pragmatist who wanted China to reassert itself on the world stage, after watching the fiasco unfold in the Soviet Union after shock therapy only an idiot would pursue such measures. China also moved in a direction to undermine its traditional enemy, Russia/USSR, the other being India which naturally crippled itself by appalling leadership. India to this day is both an ally and enemy of China at the same time. That's as schizophrenic as a state can get. 3. Singapore is a multi-ethnic city state built more or less in the image of Hong Kong. Again pragmatic leadership & free trade can do wonders at a major shipping choke point.

[@shafiyaalgiquadra1105]

What a perspicacious gentleman, well said!

[@conceptalfa]

Great analysies, thanks!!!👍👍👍

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you very much indeed!

[@debsmith5520]

Thanks, it would be great to have a video on the NATO treaty. Its legal vires. How its regime change policies align with international law.

[@johannmeiring4208]

Truth is often stranger than fiction. Thankyou Prof Ker-lindsey

[@dpal3104]

I though Navo was a defensive alliance? Or is it a war machine of the American empire...

[@p.v.h1776]

That you want it to be a war machine doesnt mean it is one. We all want to the good things in this world, but it's sometimes hard to do the good things and the West isn't perfect neather are you or other countries. Keep that in mind.

[@p.v.h1776]

Neither*

[@FOLIPE]

​@@p.v.h1776it's a war machine trying to do what it wants even when it means intervening in non member countries...

[@MARKCRASTO]

@@p.v.h1776 I'm pretty sure that his imperfections have not killed millions of people. Use your God given IQ at times..i know it must be hard for you..but try.

[@MelvinCruz]

Your video is a fantastic resume of a talk I heard from Putin a few years ago in a interview,this is the complete story

[@ronald3836]

Supporting the "Arab Spring" was priority #1. Everything that happened was seen as positive for democracy and human rights, it was really one big party, at least in the Western media. And Sarkozy and co saw an opportunity to boost their massive egos.

[@Inkan1969]

No dictator should ever be allowed to stay in power. The disaster was letting Libya deteriorate after Gadhafi was gone.

[@vizibilibende5194]

Hello everyone ...İ am in Libya now Libya is so beatifull country 🇱🇾❤🇹🇷

[@Randomstuffs261]

Libya is incredibly beautiful. I really hope your country experiences peace and prosperity in the near future.

[@雷-t3j]

I have heard that Libya is actually doing more or less fine right now. Is that true?

[@RSjs25]

@@雷-t3jYes, its paradise here

[@JadielMwai]

Good video educative,a hello of Africa

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thank you very much. And warmest regards from London.

[@m.a.118]

Great bit! While this was fantastic from a Libya-centric view, I can't help but wonder how this moment, and the greater Arab Spring, US will to intervene in Syria against Assad and ISIS (Operation Inherent Resolve), and Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong- Prompted Russia to react the way in did in Ukraine in 2013-2014 (Let alone the US interventions and NATO issues before 2010)- Quite often in the west at least, anyone who brings this stuff up, (or as the gall to connect and contextualise them), is called a Kremlin shill, bot, Putinite etc. but this is I think, is a very *very* relevant piece of context when explaining Putin's current foreign policy and scepticism/paranoia when it comes the US driven anti-Russia containment/encroachment and NATO enlargement/expansion.

[@AL-lh2ht]

Guy here thinks Russia was forced to commit genocide. Putin quite literally said the Ukraine war is about genocide. He literally said he was never Afraid of NATO. You can’t be such a tanky you are literally arguing against what Putin himself has said in supporting him.

[@kiro9257]

So was the invasion of Ukraine a warranted answer for Russia’s “paranoia”? We can all flip the narrative but everything still ends with Putin wanting a legacy for the state of Russia whether through diplomatic means or military action. Even then, the Kremlin has already stated multiple times about the genocide of the Ukrainian language, state, and of its people. Even having the courage to say that he has no fear of the Western powers, so your point is invalid.

[@雷-t3j]

Yes, because most of the people that do bring that shit up are fascist supporters, who pretend the reason fascists want to do imperialism is to "defend themselves" from the "imperialist west" by attacking a country that isn't in the west or NATO. Putin isn't paranoid about the US, because he knows that a US government that started a nuclear war by invading Russia would not be elected. His actions in Syria reflect the above points. His actions in Ukraine are for the blood and soil, so he looks good in the Russian history books.

[@Pavlos_Charalambous]

The only way that it can make any sense what you are saying is the fact that Putin been authoritarian fears that he might end up like Gaddafi

[@mulamulelilumadi4717]

You're trying to argue against intervention into other countries affairs by outside powers. Yet you use the same arguments to justify Russian intervention in Ukrainian matters. Weird.

[@owurakwabe]

Hi @jameskerlindsay, how has the regime change in libya affected the war in sudan? I know the rsf in sudan are supported by the current libyan government.