The celebrations over the complete demise of Col Muammar Gaddafi were premature, both by the rebel forces and western leaders, anxious to declare the era of brutal rule by the former army colonel at an end. But notwithstanding the heavy fighting still taking place in parts of the Libyan capital, it seems assured that the end is nigh for the North African leader. From all reports, Gaddafi and his supporters are restricted to a portion of Tripoli around the compound of the Libyan leader who came to power in a coup d'etat in 1967/68. At the same time, it seems assured that the rebel army backed by NATO has control of most of the rest of the country. Moreover, reports coming from the international media are claiming that Gaddafi's supposed army of 60,000 has been reduced to no more than 3,000 to 5,000. The reports are also contending that a large number of the forces defending the regime is made up of hard-core supporters of Gaddafi, the professional soldiers having deserted the colonel.
There are no governments in the West, none amongst the Arab/Islamic world who have defended Gaddafi. He has systematically perpetrated the worst possible crimes against his people; he has raided the quite large treasury of this rich, oil-producing country; he has been known to give support to international terrorists and has been involved in violent excursions against innocent people. There is therefore little that can be said against the action of Libyan people to oust Gaddafi and the military support given by NATO. Typical of the rule of brutal dictators is the non-achievement of Gaddafi for the decades he has been in power. What makes that even more unacceptable is that during the 42-year period of rule, the country has been flush with funds from the oilfields which produce 1.3 million barrels of oil a day for the international system of consumption. And although Libyan oil, which has gone mainly to European markets, has not been in the quantity that will make a big impact, it was significant enough when the rebellion started early this year that the absence of Libyan oil from the international markets resulted in price increases. It is logical therefore that if Libyan oil comes back to the market, there could be a decline in oil prices.
The experts however are saying that a return to full production in Libya is going to take as much as 18 to 24 months. Already, though, transnational oil giants have started jostling for a stake in restoring the production of oil. Interestingly, the Russian and Chinese companies, which were there during Gaddafi's rule, seem not to be as well-positioned as corporations from the United States and Britain, countries that were in the forefront of the efforts to oust Gaddafi. Therein lies quite a number of difficulties down the road even if Gaddafi falls, as seems imminent and logical to assume. Before the West is the example of Iraq after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Disorder, ethnic division and conflict amidst a grab for construction contracts took precedence over the welfare of the people of Iraq.
Additionally, Libya is said to possess untold supplies of petroleum resources still to be discovered. That makes the country highly attractive for international contestation against a backdrop of dwindling global resources. In such circumstances, the focus on what is best for the welfare of Libya runs a distant second. There is the fact too that the National Transitional Council, which is poised to take control of the country-with the backing of the US, the United Kingdom and France-is far from being a united body.
Apart from the scramble over the oil resources, the tribal nature of Libyan society and the inherent divisions of the transitional body may be the new seeds of continuing conflict in North Africa. The so-called Arab Spring may yet yield some bitter fruit.