Showing posts with label gaddafi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gaddafi. Show all posts

30.8.11

Libya's Poster Girl

Nisreen in Gaddafi's army

It was only a matter of time before Libya found a totem. The psychological semantics are beautifully laid out. A 19-year-old girl. Attractive. Murderer? Victim? The shadow-play is potent.

Libyan’s leader Muammar Gaddafi always had a female army alongside the traditional male one. So, what sets Nisreen Mansour al Forgani apart? Have the rebels not taken others captive, those who massacred the dissident forces? Why do all such movements feel the need to use such ‘human shields’ to drive home a point that is ironically against the debasement of the human used as shield to prop up dictatorial regimes?

It is essentially the idea of “Gaddafi's girl executioner” that has the appeal of bondage. It is essentially vicarious. Her being shackled to a bed now is a wry comment on how both sides will use an individual, especially if she happens to be an eyeball-grabbing young woman.

The rebels have taken her after she killed 11 of them, many at point-blank range. Her story, as recounted now, is about a girl who enjoyed “dance music”, which the media seems to emphasise, quite forgetting that in Gaddafi’s Libya it was not forbidden. The leader himself was given to many pleasures.

Nisreen who lived with her mother was initiated into the army by Fatma. Besides training in guns, she was also sent off by the lady to a room where military officers raped her and other young women. So, why is Fatma not being held out as the ugly face of the regime? The rebels will make the most of Nisreen. The gut-wrenching account will be for an international audience as they too like to put their best victims out.

Nisreen recounts about Fatma: “She told me that if my mother said something against Gaddafi that I should immediately kill her. If I said anything about the leader that she did not like I would be beaten and locked in my room. She also told us that if the rebels came, they would rape us.”

The rebels did not sexually exploit her, but she is being flashed around in the media. There is pity for her as she gives the details: “The rebel prisoners were tied up and kept under a tree outside. Then one by one they were brought up to the room. There were three Gaddafi volunteers with guns also in the room. They told me that if I didn’t kill the prisoners then they would kill me.”

Wasn’t she trained as a sniper? What did she expect? Weren’t most of the rebels people who opposed the regime? There were many who supported Gaddafi right until the revolution. It is a bit hard to digest that Nisreen now says her family were not supporters of the Gaddafi regime. Are these her political views? What is the genesis of it?

Was she forced to do it, or is she now claiming to be anti-Gaddafi because she fears the rebels who took her prisoner? “I told them (the rebels) what I did. They are angry. I do not know what will happen to me now.”

This is the crux. No one quite knows. If many who followed Gaddafi’s laws had been forced into doing so, then they were victims as well. Do the rebels then have the right to hold them responsible? How will the alternative powers deal with these contradictions?

In a rather macabre conversation, a rebel fighter asked her, “Do you pray?” She said she used to.

“What time of day did you kill them?”

“In the mornings.”

The rebels?
Are the rebels going to base their decision on her devotion? What does the fact that she “used to” pray convey – that she has lost faith, or that she cannot do so physically now? Is the timing important for religious reasons?

The rebels seem to be on a trip of their own. It happened with Nida in Iran, a martyr by default. It will happen with Nisreen. Where did they get the photograph of her before being tied to the hospital bed from? There are others of her weeping. These will be flaunted as part of the victory over Tripoli. The rubble from Gaddafi’s mansion with its joy rides and zoo don’t work as well as a young woman killer in tears.

25.3.11

Quote uncoat

Advaniji believes that being the prime minister was his birthright…and, therefore, he has never forgiven me

- Manmohan Singh on the BJP leader

If anything, L K Advani would never forgive Sonia Gandhi, not Manmohan Singh. As regards birthright, there are many politicians in this country who believe it is and it is taken to its logical conclusion. Dr Singh happens to be propped up by The Family, and the only reason it has not exercised its birthright is simple: Why go into the kitchen when you have a khansaama (chef)?

- - -

To our son, his excellency, Mr Barack Hussein Obama. I have said to you before, that even if Libya and the US enter into a war, god forbid, you will always remain a son

- Muammar Gaddafi, Libyan leader

The problem with such ties, even if by diplomatic adoption, is that it makes the son assert himself and want a piece of the pie and the pie (oil) chart.

16.3.11

Libya, Bahrain and shifting sands

Muammar Gaddafi talking about a holy war is like someone selling halal pork. The Libyan leader is desperate. In a single interview he shifts from “our war is against al-Qaida” to “if they (the West) behave with us as they did in Iraq, then Libya will leave the international alliance against terrorism. We will then ally ourselves with al-Qaida and declare a holy war”.

It isn’t a threat. The al-Qaeda will probably pamper him for a while, but will kick his butt soon. Also, there is no uniform international alliance against terrorism, not unless you snort something that makes you hallucinate. However, his comments should make it clear that there was too much of a rush to declare the Arab revolt a revolution. The initial silence of the West was a flashing neon light. It was like watching dogs fight inside the kennel. The guns are out with greater force. I had written last month:

This would give and has given the military more powers than it ever had, and it is pertinent to note that some of these ousted leaders have had army training and experience themselves. Therefore, the people’s protest has given way to a sneaky military coup or waiting-in-the-wings mullahs. Who will benefit the most from these ‘stopgap’ regimes? Any die-hard conspiracy theorist will tell you that it is the West, mainly the US.

Gaddafi knows what he is doing even if he may turn out to be the pawn in the game.

Now Bahrain, where the poverty paradigm of rebellion does not quite work, has the majority Shias fighting the Sunni establishment. The reason is entirely different. Yet, it is being clubbed together with the rest. The country’s defence forces have taken over with the tacit help of friendly allies like Saudi Arabia (so much for one Arab world) and the US.

Will Tunisia, Egypt, Morocco, Syria, Yemen come to the rescue? No. They won’t and they can’t. They are still fighting their battles after the war. Commentators who went to town about “overthrowing despots in the Great Revolt” are now writing about “the fissures”.

It is even beyond fissures. Again, from my piece:

What will any of these movements achieve besides dethroning the atrophied who even denied people any coherent contemporary history, except as an ode to themselves?

I do not wallow in any cynicism I expressed but as outsiders we need to understand that even when Humpty Dumpty has a great fall, it will remain a smelly eggshell.

5.3.11

Courting Quattrocchi

Well-covered?
The Indian courts are getting too smart for their own good. Or plain cocky. The chief metropolitan magistrate Vinod Yadav of the Delhi court has agreed to the CBI’s plea to withdraw the prosecution against Ottavio Quattrocchi, the controversial Italian under the scanner in the Bofors kickbacks deal.
Is it shocking? No. There was no way the proceedings in this case would indict the man; he has strong political links. However, the manner in which the judgement was pronounced leaves one wondering about how the judiciary perceives such gross acts.

Instead of making the authorities answerable for the dilly-dallying that has been going on for 24 years and has cost Rs 250 crore, the judge said:

“Can we allow this hardearned money of the aam aadmi (common man) to be spent on these types of proceedings which are not going to do any good to them after almost 25 years of the so-called arms deal? The answer will be a big no.”

Your honour, with due respect, I submit:

  • How can you answer of behalf of the aam aadmi?
  • Where are the courts when such hard-earned money is wasted on other cases – will this set a precedent to close them too because the common man’s money is being used up?
  • If the question is about what good it will do to the common man, then we may ask the same about murders, rapes, corrupt deals, scams, property disputes, everything possible where except for the people involved – the criminals and the victims – the judgement may not have any tangible impact on the rest of us.
  • On what grounds can you use a term like “so-called arms deal” when Bofors is an arms deal, irrespective of the kickbacks? And weapons are used to defend the country and its citizens, isn’t it? Or do you believe it is for political purposes?
  • The case has dragged on for all these years and the CBI says it has not succeeded in extraditing Quattrocchi from Malaysia and Argentina. He was not born there or lived there in the early stages of the probe; in fact, he visited India. Where were the people in charge then? Why did the CBI spend Rs. 40 lakh on just one attempt?

It is easy to close cases, but please do not cite the aam aadmi. The person in the street probably does not fall within the tax bracket, anyway. Those who do are also paying for the upkeep of public services, and that includes the judiciary. We expect it to act. The Bofors deal was worth Rs. 64 crores but you cannot argue the quadrupled amount that the case has incurred is not worth it. Today it would be worth much more.

Besides, justice is not about the price trying a crime entails. It is about making the people involved answerable. Give us value for money, if you will.

- - -


End Note:

There are no surprises that Col. Muammar Gaddafi would be flamboyant in the face of rebellion. It is amazing, though, that while seeking India’s support for his aggressive response to the civil war in Libya, he has told prime minister Manmohan Singh that what he is doing in his country is akin to what India is doing in Kashmir. After this, he expects support? Had there not been such a bloody trail in Libya one would find his brashness truly hilarious.