Only a few hours after the February uprising took place in Libya, I was invited to take part as a panellist in the Joe Grima One TV programme Inkontri to discuss the situation in our neighbour country.

Notwithstanding the fact that hardly anyone could tell that the crisis and virtual civil war would run for almost six months, I had stuck my neck out and made three points which I still firmly believe in:

• The root cause for the uprising needed to be externalised further

• The great divide between the rulers and the ruled had long been manifestly evident as in other Maghreb countries

• There was a strong need for any changes to reflect the true aspirations of the people themselves.

In Malta, there must have been at least four different lines of thought on how the whole issue should have been addressed.

Some within government circles felt that we should go for a gung ho militarist approach as if we were active Nato members regardless of our neutrality status.

Others in other circles of the same government felt that we should have limited our support to humanitarian aid as we did commendably.

Other somewhat dubious and spurious elements posed as charity givers when they were in actual fact angling for a piece of the action. As well as to gain turf where they could make a fast buck – instead of not always being the smoothest and most reliable of operators. Unconfirmed rumours have it that certain individual aid donors could have used such a ‘vehicle’ to push contraband items and launder money.

This in no way reflects on those other serious minded Maltese companies that did their best to try and explore new possibilities in the new Libya before the regime actually crumbled. As for the latter, I sincerely wish them luck in their endeavours.

On its part, the PL opted for a cautionary but highly responsible approach because it felt that prudence was the best option in the national interest.

It did so without either renouncing its obligations as a UN member state, while supporting the government’s humanitarian collaboration and doing its utmost from the Opposition benches to try and save what could be saved of the Maltese economic investment and activity on Libyan territory while fully respecting the wishes of the Libyan people. We also did so with the foreknowledge that although the government was consulting us – only when and how it deemed it opportune to do so – we were understandably not kept as much in the loop as we should have been. On the other hand, we moved cautiously too to avoid the most obvious of pitfalls… that of politicising the whole saga.

The same people who thought Gaddafi would disappear three or four days after the uprising took place in February fell into the same pit last week… thinking that the rebels’ relatively easy entry into Tripoli would spell the final solution to the problems in the country. But now there is definitely light at the end of the tunnel. And even more.

Those who expressed fear of a possible new Iraq or Afghanistan were dismissed as Libyan regime apologists. In actual fact such thinking emanated from leading American, European and even Israeli foundations and think tanks that never happened to be Gaddafi bedfellows. While others are still finding it difficult to forget all about the potential Islamist threat even though it might have receded and been contained recently.

One thing is certain. The pro-government media in Malta did its best to try and give the impression that the PL was only close to Gaddafi and not to the Libyans while making us forget that the last European Prime Minister to visit Gaddafi days before the uprising was none other than Lawrence Gonzi himself, while Presidents Emeritus Fenech Adami and De Marco must have been the only two eminent Maltese statesmen to be courteously welcomed by Muammar Gaddafi and his wife way, which is way beyond the standard and customary norms of Libyan protocol. A sign of the deep friendship between these former Nationalist leaders and the Gaddafi regime.

For the record it was the Gonzi government that:

• Had lobbied Libya very strongly to ensure that a Gaddafi state visit to Malta would materialise.

• Reassured the local media – as confirmed by a Times report – that it was so strongly committed to a 5+5 summit in Malta that it was even prepared to welcome a high ranking envoy should Gaddafi be personally unable to make it to the summit as the unrest had already surfaced.

• Had said, courtesy of its Interior Minister – Stop criticizing Libya – we are doing our bit by putting pressure on Europe to offer more aid to Libya to help it control its borders

• Had considered Gaddafi’s request for €5 billion from the EU as nothing new and that the Gonzi government thought it was totally justified. Quote attributable to Foreign Minister T. Borg in September 2010.

• Had boasted through its Foreign Minister in February 2011 that Malta, has not only had close contacts with Libya through successive governments but that it also remained close when UN sanctions were imposed upon it, (only to add that) it would be a mistake to stop contacts with countries because they have governments different to ours.

Malta had no option but to do business with the Gaddafi government if it wanted the best of relations with Libya. After all, he had been in power for 42 years, even before Mintoff’s first Labour government of the 70s was elected.

As things stand when writing this article, although a certain degree of uncertainty and tension continues to prevail, I feel that while the die is cast and there is no looking back, the following observations might add some value to the whole debate. Particularly as far as the challenges ahead are concerned:

I believe that the change that is happening in Libya will prove to be irreversible.

And yet those who think the days of new setbacks are over must be living in cuckoo land even though the country will continue to move decisively ahead in a new direction.

Those who thought that everything would be wrapped up by last Monday have now changed tack, even admitting as a senior British Minister stated on Tuesday that the final defeat might take a little longer, ‘as events ebb and flow over the next few days’.

But regardless of the extent of the confusion and the exact date of the end game, the main issues that will need to be addressed are the following:

Gaddafi will play no part in the future Libya

If there will be any judicial processes they must reflect well on the new governing people if these are conducted in a fair manner regardless of the heinous crimes involved

There should be no inappropriate intervention by Western powers that goes beyond an acceptable level of requested help

The International Criminal Court has tarnished its credibility by endorsing the information that Gaddafi’s son had been taken into custody when in actual fact he had engineered an escape. We are not dealing with Il Pele’ at Mater Dei in this case! Just blaming the rebels for having misinformed them does not convince anyone. The ICC recent disclaimer confused matters even more.

The commitment to avoid the pitfalls of Iraq must remain steadfast and imperative – mission creep included.

Within a certain period of time Libya needs governance by an administration with full legitimacy. The more different and reassuring it can be than the previous government the more people will feel convinced that the needed change was worth the effort

Things will need to start moving fast on the ground because if political freedoms rise and economic hardships increase simultaneously due to the fragmentation and possible implosion of the economy, then tensions and frustrations are bound to peak too.

The prospects of an Iraq styled counter insurgency seem at the time of writing most remote.

One hopes that a relatively homogeneous ruling class will emerge to avoid the fragmentation that tribal diversity can bring about in a country that has no idea or experience of party politics.

The rebels must ensure that their human rights record will be the strongest possible from now on. One cannot dismiss lightly certain human rights watch reports that were issued some months back.

On the positive side, the signal sent by Mr Jalil where he called on ALL Libyans to exercise self-restraint and to respect the property and lives of others and not to resort to taking the law into their own hands was a definite plus for the interim transitional team.

The quicker the perception is squashed that the rebels are a loose coalition united solely by their anti-Gaddafism, the easier will it be for Libya to gain much needed stability.

Malta must not only move pro actively to try and extend the necessary humanitarian aid as it has ably done so far, but it should also try and emulate the Italian government by seeking a bilateral accord on illegal immigration while trying to promote socio-economic and political contacts at the highest level and also attempting to save what can best be saved from the existing investments in pre-rebels Libya. Ironically, although the Prime Minister had pledged to put the jobs of the Maltese in Libya and in Libyan investment companies centre stage of his hurriedly called Cabinet meeting, there was not a reference to this issue in his six-point statement released through the DOI.

I sincerely wish that the Maltese people will be united in their desire for the Libyan people to succeed in their quest for freedom and democracy, although this might not happen overnight.

The same goes for the call for a quick peaceful solution to the ongoing turmoil and unrest so close to home.

All those who may feel baffled by the confusing reports in the media must grow up and realise that in times of conflict disinformation and misinformation are often the rules of the game.

To quote (rather than plagiarize!) the tragic Greek dramatist Aeschylus – by lifting something he said some 25 or 26 centuries ago: “In war, the first casualty is truth.”

How very true!

[email protected]

www.leobrincat.com

Mr Brincat is a member of the Standing House Committee on Foreign & European Affairs