Killing Qaddafi’s Son

by Nafissa Assed

Today people and media all over the world are wondering about Qaddafi’s son, Saif-Al Arab, being targeted by NATO and perhaps killed. Do we really care? As for me, not really. Qaddafi and his family are welcome to surrender anytime, dead or alive. At the same time as Musa Ibrahim was claiming the death of Qaddafi’s son and his 3 grandchildren, we watched on the national Libyan TV Qaddafi’s thugs gathering in Bab Al-azziziya dancing and singing LIVE! Must be those pills again. If NATO is going to make any advance over Qaddafi, they must seriously consider shutting down Libyan state TV and its incitement. We all know that anything can be expected from Qaddafi and that he is sick enough to even fabricate the report of the death of his own son to stay in power (the al-Arabiya channel claims ‘inner circle’ witnesses say Saif al-Arab is dead, but not his children).

The war is raging in Libya and I am against NATO killing innocent children, even if they happen to be the grandchildren of Qaddafi – because this is not about him, it’s about who the decent Libyans are and the values they stand for. On the other hand,  I believe it’s naïve if anyone thinks the rat Qaddafi and his family were really in that compound last night (30th May), and before anyone can damn NATO for the alleged deaths of Qaddafi’s grandchildren, wait for confirmation that they are his and not the bodies of kids he’s killed (remember the ‘daughter’ of Qaddafi killed by American bombing in 1986 was in fact posthumously adopted).

It’s obvious that Qaddafi is so desperate that he has no choice but to try to put pressure on the international community to discredit the military campaign. But whether his son was killed or not is insignificant. Why would his death – if it’s really true – be any different than the deaths of others in Libya? Why would one unknown son be worth more than 3000 Libyans known dead and more hurt? Isn’t this prejudice and discrimination? This loony Qaddafi doesn’t mind if he sacrifices everyone else to stay in power, and that’s the scariest part of all. It’s just sickening how “anti-imperialists” condemn the NATO bombing of Qaddafi’s compound, yet remain silent on killings in Libya by Qaddafi, in Yemen by Saleh and in Syria by Assad.

Another reason behind this big fuss over Qaddafi’s son’s death is that he’s trying to take the media attention needed in Misrata, where there are dangerous indications that Gaddafi’s campaign of murder is about to reach a new and more fatal level. There’s a lot of talk by freedom fighters in Misrata that Mutasim, another Qaddafi son, is providing gas masks to his soldiers as they prepare to attack, and over 5000 of Qaddafi’s forces have been handed masks in Zlitan and have been ordered to dress in civilian clothes preparing for Misrata.

Qaddafi’s continuous and desperate assault and his clownish propaganda will neither scare Libyans nor fool the world. By God’s will, Misrata and Nafusa will never be taken by Qaddafi.

I hope NATO bombs Gaddafi tonight and makes sure he dies this time before Misrata becomes extinct in the coming days.

2 thoughts on “Killing Qaddafi’s Son”

  1. Here’s Nafissa’s point of view, which I sympathise with but on this occasion don’t share. I fully support the intervention in Libya to protect civilians from the deranged, illegitimate tyrant. However, I don’t support the removal of Qaddafi by Nato bombs. I will dance with joy when Qaddafi is killed, but the killing should be done by Libyans. I think NATO could be doing much, much more to relieve the siege of Misrata. It should concentrate on its UN mandate rather than trying to achieve quick fixes and taking the credit for Qaddafi’s ouster.

    The intervention HAS defended Benghazi and the east of the country, and has therby saved thousands of lives. It could do much more in the West to protect civilians holding out in liberated towns and villages. It should not try to kill Qaddafi or his family.

    Before the conspiracists jump in, Nafissa is a patriotic Libyan working for no-one except herself. Her family have sacrificed greatly over the years, including in the last months. She writes for PULSE at potential personal risk. It is legitimate to politely disagree with her. Comments which accuse her of being a CIA plant, traitor etc will be deleted.

  2. from Juan Cole – “Those who complain about the course of the Libya intervention are being impatient or cynical. The intervention has saved Benghazi and other eastern cities from falling to Qaddafi’s tanks and jets. It has allowed Ajdabiya to be restored to rebel hands. It has allowed Misrata, Zintan, Yafran, Naluf and other Western cities to hold out against vicious attacks by Qaddafi loyalist armor.

    These are very major achievements compared to the situation on March 11. Qaddafi’s heavy weaponry is being systematically destroyed and his capabilities being degraded.

    I think there is actually some benefit to the war not ending quickly with a swift Eastern conquest of the West with NATO backing. [I am not advocating that it be artificially prolonged, simply observing that it is going slowly and suggesting an analysis of the political meaning of this slowness.] That may be what happens in the end. But in my view it would be preferable for the elites in Tripoli to gradually be pushed back and surrounded and put under such pressure that they turn on Qaddafi and declare for Free Libya. That way you don’t have a permanent group of losers, like the Sunni Arabs in Iraq, who would tend to make trouble in the medium term if not the long term.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s