Gaddafi and the West… The Colonel’s Need for a Foe that Legitimizes His Presence

Asharq Al-Awsat publishes excerpts from a book by Mojahed Bosify about the Libyan colonel and his thorny relations with the West

Gaddafi at his headquarters in Bab Al-Azizia, Tripoli, after the US raids in 1986. (Getty Images)
Gaddafi at his headquarters in Bab Al-Azizia, Tripoli, after the US raids in 1986. (Getty Images)
TT
20

Gaddafi and the West… The Colonel’s Need for a Foe that Legitimizes His Presence

Gaddafi at his headquarters in Bab Al-Azizia, Tripoli, after the US raids in 1986. (Getty Images)
Gaddafi at his headquarters in Bab Al-Azizia, Tripoli, after the US raids in 1986. (Getty Images)

Asharq Al-Awsat will begin, starting on Monday, releasing excerpts from a book by Libyan author Mojahed Bosify about Libya under the rule of late leader Colonel Moammar al-Gaddafi. Today’s excerpt tackles his thorny relations with the West and how he believed that its true “religion” was money, which is how he based his approach towards it. As the years went by, Gaddafi came to view the presence of the West as an “important enemy” that offered his rule longevity at the least cost.

“Dawlat al-Khayma” (The Tent State) is published by Beirut’s Difaf Publications and will be released at the Cairo Book Fair. Bosify wrote about how Gaddafi disliked the West, a position that did not change throughout his rule. The late leader recalled an encounter in the United Kingdom in 1966 when he was undergoing further military training. He recalled how he was seated next to a Briton on a train. When drinks were served, the man only paid for his order. Gaddafi objected to his behavior, which he perceived as lacking dignity. The event would shape Gaddafi’s view of the British, whom he believed do not host you or allow you to host them, which contradicts the Bedouin values on which he was raised.

After he came to power, he would recount to the BBC how his fellow Libyans were insulted by English officers during their training in the UK. “I am certain that they hated us,” he told his interviewer.

Gaddafi would never really understand the West – as friend or foe alike. He constantly viewed the West from his own Libyan lens, not from the perspective of its own history and values. Indeed, he would come to hate the West. He was keen on relaying this hatred to everyone, developing a state of enmity that in turn would bring him fame. With time, the mutual hostility between them would constantly provide the enemy with the excuse to revolt against Gaddafi, and provide him with the justifications to remain in power.

The colonel based part of his propaganda on religion and history. He believed that the hostility was part of the tenth Crusade that was targeting Libya and the entire Muslim east. He was eager to meet this hostility and at one point during a televised address challenged US President Jimmy Carter to an armed duel to resolve wars. At another instance, he alleged that westerners were part of Darwin’s missing link between man and monkey and even tasked researchers to back his claim.

Gaddafi’s failure to learn foreign languages and deep sense of pride prevented him from understanding complex political, social and industrial issues that are integral to life in the West. For nearly two decades, he kept visiting these lands, leaving behind fear wherever he went. He carried out or supported terrorist operations in most European cities, and then sent his squads of professional murderers to the United States, to assassinate opponents in the heart of the greatest enemy.

In April 1986, US President Ronald Reagan decided to set a new rule in dealing with him, so he sent a squadron of planes that bombed his private home and a few other targets. The US army missed at least two targets and caused a massacre of which the colonel cleverly benefited. But the message had arrived and served its purpose for several years. This time, the colonel understood that he had to stay calm.

After the Kuwait war, a simultaneous announcement by Britain and the United States formally accused the Libyan regime of blowing up an American civilian plane. Two Libyan men were wanted for trial. Libya, along with Iraq, was subject to a siege that lasted for seven years, before a Saudi-South African mediation succeeded in persuading Gaddafi to hand over the accused to a neutral court, before finally acknowledging responsibility of the attack.

The Lockerbie case cost Gaddafi great efforts and losses on all fronts. But he emerged from that turmoil with a new theory, which he expressed in few words: The West’s only religion is money.

The colonel started to award contracts to Western companies and his new approach did not disappoint him at all, but opened for him the paths he desired.

With his abundant money and traveling with his tent and camel, he visited most of the capitals of the West, with the exception of London, for which he maintained a lasting hatred.

During a visit to Paris, he sat on the chair of Louis XIV, after he was officially received by French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the Elysée Palace. No one had imagined at that time that he had funded Sarkozy’s election campaign.

The real problems with the West had not yet begun. They will start with the emergence of Osama bin Laden, who will strike the heart of America without mercy, in a Hollywood-like scene, from which the White House itself barely escaped.

Less than two years later, Saddam Hussein will fall in another operation. Around that day, special security units came to the heart of Tripoli at night, removing the large posters of the leader hanging on the walls, fearing that they would be too provocative. A cautious fear overwhelmed the colonel. He expected at any time the appearance of US warplanes in Libyan skies.

A week after Saddam was captured, Gaddafi finally realized that the game was over. He announced that he would abandon any programs to produce “chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.”

America waved the stick whenever necessary. In March 2004, a delegation headed by Joseph Biden, then chief Democrat in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, visited the Jamahiriya. After his meeting with Gaddafi near Sirte, he delivered a speech the next day, in which he said that the Libyan people had capabilities and opportunities, but suffered from a big problem, which is a “misleading ideology”.

The live television broadcast was immediately cut off at this point, and dozens of diplomats and politicians sought to reduce the intensity of those words. Biden, however, remained adamant about his opinion of the colonel, whom he described after his return to Washington as “not having a single bone that believes in democracy.”

While many Western delegations looked for investment opportunities in Libya, others wanted different type of information.

Two years after Joseph Biden’s visit, a delegation from the National Institute for Democracy in Washington, which was at that time headed by Madeleine Albright, the former Secretary of State, visited the African country.

The delegation, which included four experts in the region and observers of the progress of change, spent nine days wandering around the country, and came out with a report describing bleak conditions 37 years after the leader came to power.

“It is very clear that the executive authority is in the hands of Colonel Gaddafi... who created a system that carries a decision-making mechanism that is extremely dark and unclear,” the experts said.

The report goes on to explain the rest of the reality in Libya, where legal penalties are imposed on freedom of expression and assembly, to such an extent that the movements and communications of the delegation itself “were under close supervision throughout the mission.”

Many delegations flocked to Libya, while the colonel tried to carefully chart the new approach, without a valid infrastructure and no qualified cadres, except in rare cases, for use in the outside world. Gaddafi remained in a frenzied quest for “international legitimacy”, with which he hoped to crown his life as a global example.

Two years after resolving the Lockerbie crisis, the colonel was able to come out with the signing of the Initial Declaration of the African Union, for which he chose a date chose as he liked: 09/09/1999.

The African leaders could barely keep him away from the presidency of that union for ten years, before he finally won it at the exact time he wanted. As soon as he assumed the post in 2010, he also took on the Arab chairmanship at the Sirte summit a few weeks later.

Between these two presidencies, he finally arrived in New York for the first and last time in his life. This performance culminated in a speech on the world’s podium. But his address was a poorly formulated monologue. The tragic moment, which lasted for more than two hours and was broadcast live around the globe, saw the Libyan leader violate all protocols and laws, mixing topics and presenting his worst performance ever throughout his long history.

The New York trip marked the end of his fame. When that Bedouin boy finally reached the world’s apple and financial hub, he spoiled the precious opportunity.

The Western world meanwhile remained idle, waiting for the opportunity. It first publicly denied any connection with the colonel, then lifted its cover to later intervene directly to uproot him.



As Trump Seeks to Be a Peacemaker, Netanyahu Leaves Washington without Breakthrough on Gaza Deal

 Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
TT
20

As Trump Seeks to Be a Peacemaker, Netanyahu Leaves Washington without Breakthrough on Gaza Deal

 Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, arrive for a meeting at the Pentagon, Wednesday, July 9, 2025, in Washington. (AP)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s trip to Washington this week netted President Donald Trump another nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize he covets, but the ceasefire the US leader sought for the war in Gaza didn't emerge.

Despite Trump throwing his weight behind a push for a 60-day truce between Israel and Hamas, no breakthrough was announced during Netanyahu's visit, a disappointment for a president who wants to be known as a peacemaker and has hinged his reputation on being a dealmaker.

“He prides himself or being able to make deals, so this is another test case,” said Rachel Brandenburg, the Israel Policy Forum's Washington managing director and senior fellow.

Trump’s ability to strike a ceasefire deal in the 21-month war will reveal the boundaries of his influence with Netanyahu, especially after their recent joint strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities that both leaders touted at the White House this week.

Beyond the back-to-back meetings Trump and Netanyahu had at the White House this week, there was little public evidence of progress at a time when the Republican US president is pushing to end the fighting.

‘Closer than we’ve been,’ but challenges remain

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday that when it comes to a ceasefire in Gaza, “we’re closer than we’ve been in quite a while and we’re hopeful, but we also recognize there’s still some challenges in the way.”

Rubio, who spoke to reporters while traveling in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, also said that Trump “wants to see a ceasefire and we’ve invested a lot of time and energy.”

Beyond ending the bloodshed, ending the war in Gaza would give Trump more leeway to strike some of the broader agreements he seeks in the Middle East, such as expanding the Abraham Accords that started in his first term and normalizing relations with Syria’s new government.

“He wants to be the one who gets hostages home and see the war in Gaza end so he can move on to some of these bigger deals,” Brandenburg said.

Even if a truce is reached, Netanyahu has promised fighting will continue if necessary until Hamas is destroyed. The group, meanwhile, has conditioned the release of the remaining hostages on Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, a stipulation Israel has been unwilling to accept.

Trump-Netanyahu relationship sees a rebound

It’s unclear how much pressure Trump put on Netanyahu in their private talks this week. But the two leaders came into the visit seeming more aligned than ever — at least for now — fresh off the president having twice come to the Israeli leader’s assistance.

Trump made the risky move to join Israel’s attacks on Iran last month, delivering pivotal US firepower while alarming world leaders and some of Trump’s “America first” supporters. Trump also inserted himself into Israel’s domestic affairs, calling for Netanyahu’s yearslong corruption trial to be thrown out.

That’s a marked turnaround in their relationship, which had appeared somewhat strained in recent years.

Trump shocked some of his fellow Republicans and staunch supporters of Israel by publicly criticizing Netanyahu not long after Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, setting off the conflict.

He said that Netanyahu “was not prepared” for the attack from Hamas and that Netanyahu had “let us down” just before the US killed top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in 2020.

Even during his last visit to the White House earlier this year, Netanyahu seemed caught off guard when Trump announced the US would hold talks with Iran over its nuclear deal rather than embrace Netanyahu’s push for military pressure.

With their military objectives aligning for a time on Iran, the Israeli leader has worked to foster a warmer relationship.

In a video he released after the US strikes, Netanyahu spoke — in English instead of Hebrew — of the “unshakeable alliance” between their countries while repeatedly praising Trump.

“His leadership today has created a pivot of history that can help lead the Middle East and beyond to a future of prosperity and peace,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu tries the charm offensive on Trump

In his visit to Washington this week, the Israeli leader also showed he knows how to praise the president in a way that matters greatly to him when he unveiled a letter in front of reporters and cameras to announce he had nominated him for a Nobel Peace Prize.

Those gestures, though, may only carry him so far as Trump pushes for a deal that Netanyahu may not be able to accept.

“I think if Netanyahu stands in the way too much for too long of the sort of loftier objectives Trump has set out for himself,” Brandenburg said, “Netanyahu will be cast aside as more of a problem than an asset.”

Netanyahu, like many Israelis, believes Trump is the greatest friend they have ever had in the White House and is deeply grateful for the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites last month.

But the Israeli leader is also under mounting public pressure to end the war as hostages languish in captivity and more Israeli soldiers are killed in guerrilla-style attacks.

Israel’s military success against Iran has given him some political capital, but if he ends the war while leaving Hamas intact, he will have broken his repeated promise of “total victory.”

His far-right coalition partners have threatened to bolt if he does that, sparking early elections that could end his nearly unbroken 16 years in power and leave him more vulnerable to long-standing corruption charges.

That may prove too heavy a price for delivering the kind of lasting ceasefire sought by Trump and demanded by Hamas. Instead, Netanyahu, who is seen as a masterful politician by friends and foes alike, is expected to thread the needle.

In a video statement on Thursday, Netanyahu said that he would agree to a “temporary” 60-day ceasefire in return for the release of half the hostages remaining in Gaza, many of whom are believed dead, and that he would begin negotiations on ending the war.

But he conditioned any lasting ceasefire on Hamas giving up its arms – something the fighters have refused to do as long as Israel occupies parts of Gaza.

If Hamas can be disarmed through negotiations, “so much the better,” Netanyahu said. “If it is not achieved through negotiations in 60 days, we will achieve it in other ways — by using force.”