Foreign Policy is reporting that Gaddafi paid for Sarkozi's campaign but is now so upset with Sarkozy that he wants the money back. Why this turn around? The reason is that France has come out in front as the first country to recognize the rebels in Libya as the legitimate representative of the Libyan people. This has so upset Gaddafi's son, the heir to the throne in Libya, that not only has he called Sarkozy names, he is now demanding the money back. He now says that the money belongs to the Libyan people and must be returned.
I find it quite interesting that the Libyan people are now being dragged into a transaction that was carried out under cover of night, with the intention of hiding the deal from them. If the money belonged to the Libyan people, why, in the first place, was it given to Sarkozy without the knowledge of the people? Or has Mr. Gaddafi and his son suddenly discovered that the Libyan people have a right to know how the affairs of their country is run? So the Libyan people needed to take up arms before they would be given the privilege of knowing that Libyan money is being used to fund campaigns in Europe. If this whole story is reliable, then I am not sure who to hold responsible for the travesty, Gaddafi or Sarkozy.
I find it quite interesting that the Libyan people are now being dragged into a transaction that was carried out under cover of night, with the intention of hiding the deal from them. If the money belonged to the Libyan people, why, in the first place, was it given to Sarkozy without the knowledge of the people? Or has Mr. Gaddafi and his son suddenly discovered that the Libyan people have a right to know how the affairs of their country is run? So the Libyan people needed to take up arms before they would be given the privilege of knowing that Libyan money is being used to fund campaigns in Europe. If this whole story is reliable, then I am not sure who to hold responsible for the travesty, Gaddafi or Sarkozy.
5 comments:
I would leave Gaddafi responsible because it's his money he chose to give to Sarkozy and now that he wants it back and the Libyan people are getting involved this whole situation is a mess. I hope that Gaddafi get's the money back because it seems like he might have the best intentions of the Libyans in mind for once, I think he's looking out for the Libyan people in getting this money back and I think Sarkozy should give it back to him.
I think that both Gaddafi and Sarkozy have to be held equally accountable for not letting the the Liberian people know. However, i think it should be more weighted on Gaddafi's side since he was the one that gave the money away in the first place.
This whole situation just goes to show how irresponsible african leaders are with money that does not belong to them. He was right in saying that money belongs to the people however the truth of the matter is quite different. Its about time that the Libyan people take back what is rightfully theirs. This whole situation is quite embarrassing for Gadaffi and its kind of funny that hes paid for someone to denounce him
Gaddafi has been a worthless leader for the majority of his 40+ year reign. World politics have been convoluted and corrupted for centuries. Neither the giving nor the accepting should surprise anyone and further, I don't believe that it matters in the grand scheme.
If the Libyan people wanted to try the regime for each of its crimes against the people (if ever they topple the dictator), then they would all live to ripe old ages and turn to dust and bones before the trials were done.
The fact of the matter is that all Western powers and Arab nations have dealt with Gaddafi where they should not have. Replace him and move on rather than becoming mired in the mess of the past.
I also believe blame goes to both Gaddafi and Sarkozy, with more weight on Gaddafi.
It appears to me that Gaddafi only brought the Libyan people into the mix to save his own hide, as in to cover the fact that he squandered all that money in the first place.
Also, it is hard for me to think that he will actually give the money back to the people, if he ever gets it back that is. His track record has not been that great for the 40+ years he had been in office, so why would he change now? I just cannot see it happening.
Post a Comment