WHO'S NEXT?

The Libyan revolution has entered the homestretch. The operation to overthrow Muammar Gaddafi's regime, carried out by NATO forces and Libyan opposition, appears to be coming to an end. The dictator who ruled the country unchallenged for more than 40 years has been deposed. But what does the future hold for Libya? Will the country, gripped by gruelling civil war since February this year, take the path of democracy and social progress, or will it plunge into the darkness of division and endless fratricidal war?

Libyan rebels, grouped around the National Transitional Council (NTC) which has proclaimed authority in the country, have established control over almost the entire territory of the already former Jamahiriya. The fate of the regime will be decided in the battles for the cities of Sabha and Sirte (Gaddafi's home town). Rebel army leaders are saying that the backbone of Gaddafi loyalists will be completely broken in the coming days, and the former dictator will be arrested.

Meanwhile, reports are surfacing that Gaddafi, his sons and members of the government may seek refuge in Algeria. According to some, "the leader of the Libyan revolution" of almost half a century ago has moved closer to the border of the neighbouring state in a convoy of six armoured Mercedes. The rebels have not succeeded in capturing him yet. One way or another, it will now be very difficult for Gaddafi to hide anywhere in this world. The NTC and the West standing behind it make it clear that he will be caught and tried either in Libya or the International Criminal Tribunal at The Hague. It is easy to predict that any state planning to provide shelter to Gaddafi (if there is one, be it Algeria or any other) will come under tremendous pressure, which will eventually force it to hand over the former Libyan leader. In the meantime, the new Libyan authorities have promised a reward of 1.7 million dollars for Gaddafi dead or alive. It has been openly stated that US intelligence agencies have joined the operation to capture the dictator. 

All this is very much like the arrest of Saddam Hussein. After the Iraqi dictator was overthrown, it took the multinational force in Iraq and the country's new authorities a while to catch Saddam Hussein. The dictator was eventually executed, but while allies in the anti-Saddam coalition were settling scores with the Iraqi tyrant who had challenged them, the country he had once controlled was turned into a hotbed of international terrorism and plunged into permanent war.

As for present-day Libya, no-one in the country itself and in the surrounding world can say for sure that the deposition of Gaddafi will put an end to all the distress of the Libyan people. Too many "buts" are now in the way, as the country has been caught up between two implacable fires in the last few months - NATO bombardment on the one hand and the fratricidal bloodshed unleashed by Gaddafi's dictatorship and the Benghazi opposition on the other.

After the seizure of the Libyan capital the opposition government of the NTC announced that it was moving to Tripoli. Its head, Mustafa Abdul Jalil (the former minister of justice under Gaddafi), is saying that the country will hold its parliamentary and presidential elections in the next eight months.

Meanwhile, the UN Security Council has approved an initiative to release 1.5 billion dollars in Libyan assets. According to a representative of the US State Department, Victoria Nuland, the initial tranche of 500 million dollars will be spent on the "emergency humanitarian needs" of the Libyan people. The second tranche for the same amount will be released to cover the NTC's international bills and finance Libyan energy facilities. Finally, the third tranche will be used to finance expenses in the fields of healthcare, education and food supply.

The situation in Libya should soon stabilize and the civil stand-off come to an end. But it cannot be ruled out that developments are only beginning to unfold in this North African country. Many analysts see a number of similarities with the Iraqi campaign where the hottest phase did not commence until after Saddam Hussein was overthrown, turning Iraq, one of the most ancient places of human civilization, into a complete mess.

The developments in Libya are, beyond doubt, part of the Arab revolution, a powerful and at the same time unpredictable transformation of the entire Arab community which has settled down to a course of significant social, political and ideological reforms. But the most important question for Libya, and indeed for any other country affected by the Arab spring, is whether the main driving forces of the revolution will be able to coalesce their own ranks in the post-revolution period. Obviously, all opposition forces in Libya rally around a common cause - to overthrow Gaddafi. But can they stay united after getting the better of the former regime? Can they ensure a bloodless and painless transition from dictatorship to democracy which has been proclaimed by the anti-Gaddafi movement as the pivotal and strategic mission? And finally, are the Libyan people ready to build an open society even if this what the Western superpowers want who have helped the rebels hoist their flag in Tripoli? Evidently, so far there are more questions than answers.

Meanwhile, foreign forces, without waiting for the fighting between the NTC forces and the remnants of Gaddafi loyalists to subside, have started dividing Libya's oil "cake". Indicative is the example of Italy, one of the most active participants in the anti-Gaddafi coalition and the biggest European consumer of Libyan oil. Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini has confirmed the intention of Italian oil company Eni to play a leading role in Libya's oil industry.

In the meantime, the rebel government has stated its readiness to honour the international agreements signed under Gaddafi. However, an official representative of the Libyan oil company Agoco, now under the control of the NTC, Abdeljalil Mayouf, has made an important clarification to this statement. "We have no problem with companies from Western countries, e.g. Italian, French and British. But we may have problems of a political nature with Russia, China and Brazil."

The Libyan authorities are thus making it clear that they can terminate cooperation with the countries that maintained close ties with the Gaddafi regime. The biggest losses may therefore be suffered by Russia whose leading oil and military enterprises had very profitable business in Libya. And this is an important indication that developments in Libya, and indeed elsewhere in the Arab world, may have major geopolitical repercussions.

It would be relevant to point to the expressive statement by a senior adviser for US President Barack Obama, the deputy head of the National Security Council on strategic communications, Ben Rhodes (who is considered one of the US president's foreign political speechwriters). In an interview with Foreign Policy magazine, he stressed that the Obama administration was viewing the latest developments in Libya as proof of the fact that its approach to the problem of regime change overseas was correct. The approach spelled out by Rhodes may be described as a "national liberation" one. This is a methodological and tactical, if not essential, difference in approach from the "occupation" that was applied by the former US president, Republican George Bush. Obama's adviser is sure that the policy being pursued by the incumbent US administration was more effective and less costly for the United States.

"The fact that it is Libyans marching into Tripoli not only provides a basis of legitimacy for this but also will provide contrast to situations when the foreign government is the occupier. While there will be huge challenges ahead, one of the positive aspects here is that the Libyans are the ones who are undertaking the regime change and the ones leading the transition," Rhodes said. Proceeding from this, he draws the following conclusion: "The strategy for the military intervention in Libya will not only result in a better outcome in Libya but also will form the basis of the preferred model for any future military interventions."

This admission looks quite valuable from the standpoint of the prospects for US strategy on the international arena which, to a great extent, will aim to further restrain America's key geopolitical rivals (or competitors, if we were to speak the deliberately correct language of global business that the West sees as the foundation of the modern world order). In particular, it is quite possible that Russia runs the risk of losing yet another partner in the Arab world - Syria. Western strategists, including Ben Rhodes, or the former candidate for US presidency, John McCain, are making it clear that after the toppling of Gaddafi, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad may face a similar destiny. The plight of the latter is exacerbated further by the fact that he is a close ally of Iran, above which clouds have been gathering for several years now. The 21st century world is on the threshold of new ordeals that will primarily affect the countries destined to settle down to a course of "national liberation" in the spirit of American globalism.