THE story of the late Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi always makes sad reading.
Here is a man who had a vision not only for his country, but for Africa — a man who was on a mission to ensure the resources Libya had supported his vision.
It was his vision of a United States of Africa that made him a villain in the eyes of the West.
Perhaps just the thought of a unified Africa with one currency was more than a threat to the West.
And Gaddafi or ‘Brother Leader’, as he was known by others, made history by not only transforming the desert in his country into a man-made wonder of the world, but by ensuring his people completely benefitted from the country’s resources.
The great man-made river (GMR) in Libya will forever remain one of Gaddafi’s biggest feats and it’s a pity he was ruthlessly murdered before he had finished this massive project.
As mentioned in our lead story this week, when opening Phase Two of the GMR project in 1996, Gaddafi said: “This is the biggest answer to America and all the evil forces who accuse us of being concerned with terrorism.
We are only concerned with peace and progress.
America is against life and progress; it pushes the world toward darkness.”
Was Gaddafi’s analysis of the US wrong?
Is it not true that when it comes to Africa, the US, and the West in general, are against life and progress?
And is it not true that the same US and the West constantly push Africa into darkness?
From time immemorial, whites have always referred to Africa as a ‘dark continent’.
The same whites today still talk about discoveries in Africa as if the same Africa had no people but animals.
To date, they (whites) still regard themselves as the finest flower of civilisation.
But back to Gaddafi’s Libya then, a land of life, milk and honey.
It is on record that during Gaddafi’s era, every citizen had a decent home, the country had the highest life expectancy in Africa, education was free, there was free healthcare, farming inputs and land was virtually for free for all who were interested in farming. Consider the numerous benefits women had in Libya during Gaddafi’s time.
It is said before Gaddafi, a handful of women went to university unlike during Gaddafi’s time when half of university students were women.
Every woman who gave birth was guaranteed of US$5 000 to cater for her needs and the child’s while working mothers enjoyed cash bonuses for children and even free day care.
Gaddafi provided grants and decent housing for all newly-weds in his country and he even funded any citizen who needed to go abroad whether for any desired health or educational purposes.
On top of this, all Libyans enjoyed free electricity, cheapest fuel and even interest-free loans.
Why then did the US and its allies castigate Gaddafi, calling him a dictator?
Why would the West, as the so-called ‘champions of human rights and democracy’, label Gaddafi a basher of human rights yet he provided Libyans with everything they needed from abundant water, food, shelter and clothes?
Remember this is the same Gaddafi the West had courted, wined and dined.
This is the same Gaddafi who made headlines about the need to pitch his tent in New York in order to attend the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 2009.
Isn’t that hypocrisy at its worst?
And it is our understanding that before the UN Security Council had even come up with that fateful decision that led to the invasion of Libya by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), the same Western countries had already begun siphoning Libya’s oil.
And the same NATO left Libya in tatters and yes, the GMR was not spared.
And yes, the world watched as the US and Western countries looted Libya’s oil and as Gaddafi’s eighth wonder of the world was being destroyed.
Let this be a lesson to Zimbabweans — that the West never has permanent friends — only permanent interests.