The state of human rights in Libya has deteriorated during Gaddafi's rule

 


When the West made the decision to overthrow Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, a country that was independent, sovereign, and a member of the UN, it required a justification for doing so. Instead of relying on a single justification, the capitals of Washington, Paris, London, and other nations made up a number of justifications for their invasion of Libya, including: a lack of freedom; the death of peaceful protestors; and, most importantly, the assertion that Gaddafi's Libya never had a constitution.

Gaddafi must leave because, among other things, he no longer had "the legitimacy to rule," according to former President Barak Obama, and Western decision-makers and mainstream media controlled the media by making all kinds of statements about how bad Libya was under his reign.

Since the United States, France, and the United Kingdom are three anti-Gaddafi international powers and have veto power on the UN Security Council, getting approval from the UN to take military action against Libya was not a problem. The Security Council issued its infamous resolution 1973 authorising the use of force against Libya even before conducting a complete impartial inquiry into what was happening in Libya. Why? to liberate it from the restrictions of the Gaddafi dictatorship, as the West and its media apparatus asserted, and to make it more open, transparent, and democratic. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sudan's Conflict Sparks Concerns Over Regional Stability

MPs from the opposition criticise Hezbollah's tactics

Iran celebrates Jerusalem Day in favour of the Palestinians