4. Mohammed Gaddafi and the English Language

Muammar Gaddafi, who ruled Libya for over 42 years, became infamous not just for his unique fashion, eccentric behaviour, and stubbornness, but for his outspoken criticism of America. Despite his competence as a leader, Gaddafi's controversial actions, such as openly criticizing America without any hesitation, earned him the ire of many world leaders, especially those in other Muslim-majority countries. They warned him to avoid such direct confrontations, but Gaddafi continued to target America, eventually contributing to his downfall. In his early years, Gaddafi was an effective leader. Under his rule, Libya achieved significant progress in human resource development, education, health, agriculture, and industry, becoming a leading country in Africa in these areas. Additionally, Libya’s national revenue saw growth, placing it among the countries with the highest per capita income globally. As a result, Gaddafi was widely regarded as a trusted leader by the Libyan people. However, his political sensitivity often turned into stubbornness, which had consequences. Gaddafi's stubbornness, while largely a private matter, at times impacted his public decisions, and one such decision left a dark mark on Libya's future. His strong animosity toward America extended to their language—English. Not only did he despise the American government, but Gaddafi also harboured a strong disdain for the English language, which led him to actively discourage its teaching in Libya. He even banned English language education, depriving an entire generation of Libyans of the opportunity to learn the language for about a decade. This decision was a significant setback for the country’s educational and professional development. As a result of this decision, all of Libya was plunged into darkness for a decade. In a world on the edge of the 20th century, where people were striving to learn the English language, how would it have been if a country, for trivial reasons, had banned that language saying, "We don’t need it"? Just imagine the situation. As a consequence, the learning and teaching of English were abandoned in schools and colleges. Books related to the English language were publicly burned in the presence of the then Minister of Education. Gradually, Libya, without any contact with the English language, started distancing itself from the outside world. Meanwhile, the people of Libya began developing a strong aversion to learning English, and they turned away from the global community. The language was considered an enemy language, and the decision to not learn it was deeply ingrained. Even today, there is a clear phobia about the language among the people here. When I, a foreigner who didn’t speak Arabic, tried to speak English with the people of that generation who didn’t know English, they would apologize saying, "Malish, malish, ma'arif Englishi" (Sorry, I don’t know English) and run away. However, some educated and wealthy individuals went to neighboring countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Niger, Nigeria, and Ghana to learn English and returned. But the middle-class and poor people were left behind, unable to even learn the basics of the language. As a result, the people of Libya, while praising Gaddafi for his other deeds, still curse him for this particular decision. They lament, saying, "Because of him, we were never able to learn English." So, why did Gaddafi ban the English language in Libya for ten years, from 1986 to 1996? What was such a strong reason? When asked, many people here say that it was Gaddafi’s stubbornness and his personal hatred towards Americans that led to this. Due to Libya's alleged support for terrorist activities in Ireland, Europe had already placed Libya on the list of “terrorist” countries. However, in 1986, after the bombing of a nightclub in Berlin, where Gaddafi was suspected to be involved, the United States also added Libya to its list of “terrorist” countries and retaliated by bombing Libya's capital, Tripoli. As a result, Libya was temporarily isolated. Later, in 1988, Libya was implicated in the bombing of a Pan Am flight, flight 103, over Lockerbie, Scotland. For a long time, Gaddafi denied any involvement. This led the United Nations to impose further sanctions on Libya. This enraged Gaddafi, and in retaliation for his anger towards Americans, he decided to ban the English language in his country, asking why his people should read, write, or speak the language of his enemies.

However, Hafid Fis, the director of the Amazigh International Council (Amazigh refers to an ethnic minority group in Libya that has been historically marginalized), says, “Gaddafi’s ban on the English language for about ten years was merely an excuse for his anger towards Americans. The real reason is different. Gaddafi was afraid of the Libyans. Since he came to power, Gaddafi gradually gained control over the Libyans and began to oppress them. He feared that if they learned English, they might communicate with the outside world and expose his oppression. Therefore, he deliberately banned the English language in his country and ensured that his people did not learn it. In fact, Gaddafi maintained good relations with many English-speaking countries, including his bitter enemy, the United States. He used this policy as a tool to prevent the Libyan people from connecting with the outside world.” If we carefully examine this statement by comparing it with the days before and after Gaddafi's ban on the English language, there seems to be no validity in his words. This is because, from the very beginning of his rule, Gaddafi sent his citizens, including those learning English, on scholarships to English-speaking countries like America and Britain. If he was afraid of the Libyans, why would he send them to English-speaking countries? Furthermore, were there no Libyans who had learned English before 1986 who could have spoken out about his oppression? And after lifting the ban on the English language, did he not fear that his people might learn English and expose his oppression to the outside world? If so, why did he encourage English education again? The answer to all these questions is clear. Gaddafi banned the English language out of his anger towards America, and there was no malicious intent behind the decision. This is supported by a Ph.D. student named Al Moghani Hassan Mohammed, who states in his thesis, “Students’ Perceptions of Motivation in English Language Learning in Libya”, how Gaddafi’s hatred towards the English language and Americans had a negative impact on the Libyan people's ability to learn English. He also describes how the citizens followed their leader in this regard. He further adds, Gaddafi once said in his speech about Americans: "We strongly condemn the imperialist nation of America, which threatens the sovereignty of Jamahiriya (Libyan socialism). In this regard, we are all enemies of the Americans. Let our hatred for the Americans be recorded in history." This intense hatred toward Americans by Gaddafi had a profound effect on the Libyan people as well. Like him, they too became enemies of Americans and began to hate the English language. As a result, every child born here became a product of hatred toward Americans. Gradually, as Libya’s relationship with America improved, Gaddafi began to realize the importance of the English language. He also understood the truth that without learning English, the business dealings of the Americans would remain unknown to them and Libya would have no bright future. As a result, he resumed the teaching of English. Some claim that Gaddafi banned English and then resumed its teaching in 1992, but it wasn’t widely implemented across the country until 1996. Others assert that for about ten years, from 1986 to 1996, Libya had no exposure to the English language. However, from 1996 onwards, Gaddafi made all the necessary arrangements to facilitate the learning of English. He hired English teachers from neighboring countries such as Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, and Egypt, and resumed teaching English. He also sought help from English-speaking countries to develop textbooks for primary, preparatory, and secondary schools. This is why the English textbooks in Libya are of such high quality. The unfortunate part, however, is the lack of good teachers to teach them properly. Meanwhile, a survey conducted revealed that Indians were equally proficient in English compared to the British. Based on this, from 2000 onwards, Gaddafi began recruiting Indian English lecturers for Libyan colleges and placed greater emphasis on the learning of English. So, did Gaddafi know English? Was he able to speak in English? The answer is definitely yes. Gaddafi learned English during his secondary school education and while pursuing his B.A. However, he had to cut short his studies to ascend the throne of Libya, effectively ending his formal education. As a result, his knowledge of English was limited. Could he speak English? Certainly, he could. While he wasn’t fluent, he could articulate what he wanted to say slowly yet precisely in English. He would speak in English only when absolutely necessary, at least until he banned the English language in his country. Even before banning English, his interviews with foreign media were always conducted in English. However, after prohibiting the language in Libya, he completely stopped speaking English. In the subsequent years, whenever he had to give interviews to English channels or hold discussions with leaders of other nations, he always had a skilled translator by his side who was fluent in both Arabic and English. This translator would interpret English into Arabic for Gaddafi and convey Gaddafi's words back into English for others. Beyond that, Gaddafi never liked speaking in English, and he largely avoided it. In 1999, the famous interviewer Daphne asked Gaddafi during a BBC interview, "So… when are you going to quit and leave the stage for someone else?" The translator, possibly due to fear, embarrassment, or not understanding the question properly, remained silent. Daphne asked the same question again, and the translator stayed silent. At this point, just as Daphne was considering asking the question in Arabic, Gaddafi, unable to speak English fluently, said without the help of a translator: "It is not about me quitting, after all – I am the head of a revolution…” Despite this, Gaddafi, on September 23, 2009, at the United Nations, made sure to prepare thoroughly and delivered his speech in English for about 90 minutes (15 minutes longer than the allotted time), setting a historical record. This was his first speech at the United Nations. However, leaders from English-speaking countries, including the United States, looked down upon him. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and other prominent figures did not attend his speech. In fact, even US Secretary Hillary Clinton and American diplomats walked out before he began his speech. Nevertheless, Gaddafi persistently continued speaking in English, expressing without hesitation everything he wanted to say. Initially, he pointed out that the United States should learn from the Middle Eastern countries on how to properly host guests. He also remarked that the United Nations, according to its Charter, should treat all its members equally. However, he highlighted that this principle was not followed in practice and symbolically waved the Charter in front of the gathering. He continued, saying that the primary purpose of the United Nations was to prevent wars around the world, to preserve global peace. Yet, since its founding in 1945, 65 wars had occurred globally, and the UN had failed to prevent them. He questioned the very existence of the United Nations. Moving on, he urged the United States to stop interfering in other countries’ matters, criticizing the Iraq war as "America’s ultimate crime." Regarding the Palestinian conflict, he called for Palestinians and Israelis to live together in one country. However, those who listened to his speech found it difficult to understand his points, as it lacked coherence and logical flow, leading to further disregard for him. Unfortunately, this speech was Gaddafi’s final speech at the United Nations. Photo 1: In 1999, before the famous interviewer Daphne took Gaddafi to the studio for the BBC Channel interview. Kannada Original: Uday Itagi English Translation: Uday Itagi

What is the main cause for Iran-Israel and America War?

ನಿಷ್ಮಾ ಇರ್ಷಾದ್ ಒಬ್ಬ ದಿಟ್ಟ ಪತ್ರಕರ್ತೆ. ಇವರು Kannada One News Channel ನಲ್ಲಿ ಕೆಲಸ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ನಾನು ನಿನ್ನೆ ಕ್ವೀನ್ಸ್ ರೋಡಿನಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಎರಡು ಚಾನೆಲ್ಗಳಿಗೆ ಇರಾನ್ ಯುದ್ದದ ಕುರಿತಂತೆ ಸಂದರ್ಶನವನ್ನು ಕೊಟ್ಟೆ ಎಂದು ಹೇಳಿದ್ದೆನಲ್ಲ, ಆ ಕನ್ನಡ ನ್ಯೂಸ್ ಚಾನೆಲ್ ನ ಸಂಪಾದಕೀಯ ಮುಖ್ಯಸ್ಥರಾಗಿ ಇವರು ಕೆಲಸ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಅವರೇ ನನ್ನನ್ನು ಸಂದರ್ಶನ ಮಾಡಿದ್ದು. ಅವರು ಕೇಳಿದ ಪ್ರಶ್ನೆಗಳು ಕೂಡ ಸದ್ಯದ ಪರಿಸ್ಥಿತಿಗೆ ತುಂಬಾ ರಿಲೆವೆಂಟಾಗಿದ್ದವು. ಇವರು ಮಂಗಳೂರಿನವರಾದ್ದರು ಕೂಡ ಬಹಳಷ್ಟು ವಿಚಾರಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಇವರು ದಕ್ಷಿಣಕನ್ನಡದವರಂತೆ ಇಲ್ಲ. ಮಂಗಳೂರಿನ ಕೆಲವೇ ಕೆಲವು ಬರಹಗಾರರು ಮತ್ತು ಪತ್ರಕರ್ತರಲ್ಲಿ ಇವರು ಕೂಡ ಒಬ್ಬರು. ಅವರ ದಿಟ್ಟ ನಿಲುವು ಮತ್ತು ತಮ್ಮನ್ನು ತಾವು ಪ್ರೆಸೆಂಟ್ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳುವ ರೀತಿ ತುಂಬಾ ಇಷ್ಟವಾಯಿತು. ಅವರು ನನ್ನ ಸಂದರ್ಶನ ಮಾಡಿದ ಲಿಂಕ್ ಅನ್ನು ಇಲ್ಲಿ ಕೊಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದೇನೆ ನೋಡಿ ನಿಮ್ಮ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ತಿಳಿಸಿ. https://youtu.be/TAu7P8atP8k?si=rb3MVozMswKuDw4k

3. Muammar Gaddafi and His "Green Book"

In the first part, I discussed the concept of equality during Gaddafi's regime. In this context, I expressed surprise and doubt about how such equality could be possible in a dictatorship. However, one day, I came across Gaddafi's book "The Green Book" in our college library, and it provided answers to all my questions. As I read, I became astounded by his lines of thinking. After taking power as the head of the country on September 1, 1969, Gaddafi resigned from the position in 1972, assuming the title “Brotherly Leader and Guide of the First of September Great Revolution of the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya” and took control of Libya. This title sparked hope among many people. During a time of changes in Asia and Africa, Gaddafi, a young man who came to power, seemed to many like a liberator for Africa and the Arab world. Quickly, Gaddafi brought about significant changes in Libya, making it one of the leading nations in Africa. Like Mao's "Little Red Book", Gaddafi also abolished the constitution of Libya that had been in place for six years after he took power and published his own "The Green Book" in 1975. This marked the beginning of his rule according to his own ideas. In the book, Gaddafi outlined his new political, economic, and social ideologies, which startled the world. As usual, there was much talk about his "Green Book": some called it a book of Gaddafi’s false ideas, others saw it as a strategy to deceive the people. Some believed that with the "Green Book", Gaddafi slowly won over the Libyan people, bringing them under his control. However, it wasn’t false that his "Green Book" quickly became extremely popular in Libya. It was even adopted as a textbook in schools and colleges. Children, youth, and adults alike were influenced by his ideas. Thus, through his "Green Book", Gaddafi swiftly and firmly embedded his thoughts in the hearts and minds of the people.

Some experts have compared Gaddafi's political and economic ideas presented in the Green Book to the philosophies of Rousseau, Karl Marx, and Mao. Others have stated that he based his ideas on Islamic principles. However, in an interview given to an English newspaper in 1979, Gaddafi confidently stated about his Green Book: “America may wage war against us, the West may isolate us, but I am not worried. My ‘Green Book’ continues to speak to the world.” It is no surprise that, in this context, the Green Book was seen as an invaluable text by the Libyan people. They believed that the Green Book was their breath, and their breath was the Green Book. So, what exactly did the Green Book contain? What did Gaddafi say in it? Let's take a look. The first pages of Gaddafi's Green Book begin by criticizing the system of democracy. In a democratic system, the party that wins the most votes comes to power. For example, let’s assume there are two parties, 'A' and 'B'. If party 'A' wins 51% of the votes and party 'B' wins 49%, then naturally, the party with 51% of the votes comes to power. This means that 49% of the people do not agree with the government, but they are still subjected to the rule of the party that has 51% of the votes, and they are expected to obey whatever the government says. However, Gaddafi believed that true democracy meant there should be no parties, because creating parties would divide society like splitting it into two factions. In a democratic system, citizens should participate directly in everything, not through elected representatives. Many political experts sharply criticize Gaddafi for using this principle as a weapon against the Libyan people, claiming that he manipulated them into believing in his system of socialism while preventing any form of democracy from being established. They argue that Gaddafi made the people of Libya fall into his trap by deceiving them about the flaws of democracy, and he ensured that a true democratic system never emerged in the country. In the second part, Gaddafi discusses socialism and the economic system. In a socialist society, there are no laborers. Even if there are, they should not be called "laborers." Instead, consider them your collaborators. They are not inferior to you. They, like you, have contributed to the upliftment of society and are active participants in it. Remember, laborers are never slaves to their masters. The only way to eliminate the system of slavery is to abolish that very system. Therefore, in his view, laborers should not be looked down upon. Gaddafi argued that every family should perform its own daily household tasks. According to him, whether housewives are paid for their work or not, they are always slaves as long as they are doing the work. He compared a prisoner and a laborer as being no different, both being in bondage. His extreme concern for the plight of laborers had a deep impact on the people of Libya. For example, taxi drivers there cannot lift or unload your luggage. If your luggage is too heavy, only if you request them kindly, out of human compassion, they may help you. Otherwise, you must do the work yourself. Additionally, there is no concept of dignity of labor there. I have traveled in taxis in Tripoli many times, and I have spoken to drivers. Many of them do this as a part-time job. In the morning, they work as teachers, lecturers, or in other professions. In that sense, Gaddafi ensured that Libyans were economically independent. However, it is ironic that while Gaddafi advocated for everyone to do their own work, he employed workers in his own house. When asked by the people, they often wonder, "What is wrong with employing workers when a person takes on the responsibility of governing an entire country?"

Gaddafi dreamed that every citizen of his country should own their own home. According to him, a person who lives in someone else's house, whether paying rent or not, will always remain a slave to the owner of that house. Therefore, he proposed a plan to provide each family with a house. Additionally, he offered interest-free loans for people to buy cars, so that they could own their own vehicles. However, many Libyans would build just a few stages of their homes and then stop, never completing them. Gaddafi never questioned them about why they did not finish the construction. Some of Gaddafi's statements about workers were far from reality. Just as Karl Marx’s statement that “half of the wealth of the capitalists should go to the working class” proved to be unrealistic, many of Gaddafi’s theories were also impractical and led to dissatisfaction among the capitalists of Libya. In the third part, Gaddafi presents his views on women. He firmly believed that women were equal to men, except for biological differences. He argued that in every aspect, women were just as capable as men, and in some ways, women were actually superior. He pointed out that while men cannot menstruate, bear children, or nurse; women can do all of these things, making them more fortunate in his view. Gaddafi encouraged women not to see their roles as a curse but as a blessing. He ensured equal opportunities for women in all sectors, fought internationally for the rights of Libyan women, and even advocated for women who married Europeans or Englishmen to receive citizenship, ensuring they had the right to seek justice in case of divorce. Gaddafi went as far as to appoint only female soldiers for his personal protection, believing in their competence. He trusted their abilities and sought to show the world that women were just as capable as men. Additionally, he believed that by granting women military roles, he was demonstrating that they could defend themselves in times of crisis. Through appointing women to the highest military positions, such as personal bodyguards, Gaddafi showed the world that women could hold important roles in defence and leadership. Thus, Gaddafi became the first leader in the world to acknowledge women’s competence in such positions, making a significant statement about their abilities. Gaddafi, when writing The Green Book, was neither the most educated nor the most well read individual. However, it is believed that he was heavily influenced by the speeches of Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser. In 1952, when Nasser overthrew the British-backed King Farouk of Egypt, he became a role model for the young Gaddafi. Nasser's speeches, broadcast on Cairo's radio program "Voices of Arabs," had a significant impact on Gaddafi. In his 1955 book, Egypt’s Liberation: The Philosophy of the Revolution, Nasser argued that the Arab world was drifting aimlessly and urgently needed a leader to unite it and lead it forward. Gaddafi, inspired by this, believed that he could be that leader and began working toward unifying the African continent, eventually becoming a popular leader by implementing the ideas presented in The Green Book. Not content with simply gaining popularity in Libya, Gaddafi sought to spread his philosophies globally. Between the 1980s and 1990s, he spent millions of dollars translating The Green Book into over thirty languages, hosting discussions, and funding research on it. However, on February 17, 2011, Libyan rebels burned The Green Book as a symbol of their protest, marking the beginning of the Libyan revolution. This act of defiance set the stage for the subsequent turmoil in the country, the outcome of which is well known. Photo 1: Gaddafi participating in a discussion on The Green Book in Sebha on March 7, 2007. Photo 2: The Green Book Photo 3: Gaddafi's green flag, representing Libya under his leadership. Kannada Original: Uday Itagi English Translation: Uday Itagi

ಜಗತ್ತಿನ ಎಲ್ಲಾ ಅನೀತಿಯ ಮೂಲ US- ಇರಾನ್- ಇಸ್ರೇಲ್ ಯುದ್ಧದ ಪೋಸ್ಟ್ ಮಾರ್ಟಂ.

ಇವತ್ತು ಬೆಂಗಳೂರಿನ ಕ್ವೀನ್ಸ್ ರೋಡಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಇರುವ ಎರಡು ಯುಟ್ಯೂಬ್ ಚಾನೆಲ್ ನವರು ನನ್ನನ್ನು ಸಂಪರ್ಕಿಸಿ ಇರಾನ್ ಮತ್ತು ಇಸ್ರೇಲ್ ಸಂಘರ್ಷದ ಬಗ್ಗೆ ಮಾತನಾಡಬೇಕೆಂದು ಕೇಳಿಕೊಂಡರು. ಸಂಘರ್ಷಕ್ಕೆ ಮೂಲ ಕಾರಣ ಏನು ಇರಬಹುದು? ಮತ್ತು ಈ ಯುದ್ಧ ಎಲ್ಲಿಗೆ ಹೋಗಿ ಮುಟ್ಟಬಹುದು? ಒಂದು ವೇಳೆ ಯುದ್ಧದಲ್ಲಿ ಅಮೆರಿಕ ಮತ್ತು ಇಸ್ರೇಲ್ ಗೆದ್ದರೆ ಏನಾಗಬಹುದು? ಅಥವಾ ಇರಾನ್ ಗೆದ್ದರೆ ಏನಾಗುತ್ತದೆ ಎನ್ನುವುದನ್ನು ನಾನು ಅಲ್ಲಿ ವಿಶ್ಲೇಷಿಸಿದ್ದೇನೆ. 

 ಬಿಡುವು ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡು ಈ ವಿಡಿಯೋ ನೋಡಿ ನಿಮ್ಮ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ ತಿಳಿಸಿ.

https://youtu.be/TUMIEkQdNpc?si=2x4zsOL_EvmQVtx3

2. Mohammed Gaddafi: A Popular Leader of the Arab World

Libya, a tribal country situated in Africa close to the Arab world, was where Muammar Gaddafi was born in 1942 in Sirte. His parents belonged to a nomadic tribal community. Gaddafi did not face difficulties in receiving an education. Although he enrolled in Benghazi University to study geography, he didn’t complete his degree due to his deep political sensitivities. Influenced by Egyptian statesman Gamal Abdel Nasser's Arab socialism, Gaddafi played a significant role in anti-Israel movements during the Suez Crisis in 1956. His political ambitions led him to join the military.

While studying at the Hellenic Military Academy in Greece, Gaddafi planned to overthrow Libya’s monarchy, but he couldn’t execute it at that time. Later, after receiving military training in Britain, he returned to Libya and brought his plan to fruition. Historically, Libya lacked a significant monarchical legacy, with only a single monarch, King Idris. In 1969, while King Idris was in Turkey for medical treatment, a group of junior military officers led by Gaddafi placed the crown prince under house arrest. Through this bloodless coup, Libya transitioned from monarchy to independence under the control of another leader who didn’t call himself a king. Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who became Libya’s supreme leader in 1969, ruled the country effectively for 42 years. Rising to power at a young age, Gaddafi became a figure of both hope and expectation for the people of Libya and the world. During a time of significant change across Asia and Africa, the young leader was seen by many as the Che Guevara of Africa and the Arab world. In line with these expectations, Gaddafi refrained from declaring himself the head of the military or taking other grand titles, instead remaining content with the rank of "Colonel," which inspired trust in many.

Muammar Gaddafi was not only politically sensitive but also played a highly strategic role in the economic development of his country. Until 1969, Libya relied heavily on Western nations for the technology to extract oil from its oil fields. Foreign companies took advantage of this dependency by setting oil prices according to their needs and benefiting immensely from the oil trade. Libya was struggling as it sold its oil without reaping substantial profits. However, as soon as Gaddafi came to power in 1969, he re-evaluated the contracts with foreign companies and took control. He threatened to stop oil production for companies that did not agree with his decisions. He also advised other oil-producing nations to adopt the same policy. As a result, these nations quickly became wealthy. Libya had abundant oil resources but a small population. Gaddafi used the profits from oil to uplift the country. As a result, Libya quickly became recognized on the world map and earned the title of "King of Kings" of Africa. Whether you believe it or not, under Gaddafi’s rule, Libya made enormous progress. In human resource development, education, healthcare, agriculture, and industry, Libya ranked first across all of Africa. Additionally, Libya's national per capita income placed it among the countries with the highest per capita income in the world. During his rule, Libya never took a single penny in loans from any country. There was no beggar in the country (and if there was one, they were not Libyan beggars; they were from Egypt, Niger, or Nigeria). Gaddafi also followed progressive policies regarding women. He had immense faith in their capabilities and demonstrated that women were no less than men by appointing them as his bodyguards. He provided equal opportunities for women in all fields. Unlike some other Muslim countries that imposed restrictions on women, he did not impose any such restrictions in Libya.

Although Gaddafi was an authoritarian leader, he was politically very shrewd. He kept Libya at the forefront of the African continent, far ahead of many other African nations. While governments in neighboring countries like Tunisia and Egypt were falling and people were taking to the streets, we all sat from a distance thinking the same would happen in Libya. However, having lived there for three and a half years (before the revolution), I observed that Libya was never as bad as those two countries. It always worked towards being at the forefront of progress. This was because, in terms of development, Gaddafi’s leadership was proactive. He succeeded in providing essential infrastructure, such as hospitals, schools, colleges, banks, post offices, and good roads, to every village and town. He also helped build hospitals and schools in other poor African nations. Gaddafi provided so many facilities to the Libyans that they continue to remember him for them, and often express doubts about whether they will ever receive such benefits again. He wanted every family in his country to own a house. To this end, he gave $50,000 to newly married couples to build a home, and no interest was charged on any loan they took. He provided free education, healthcare, Wi-Fi internet, and electricity to the people. Before Gaddafi, only about 25% of Libyan citizens were literate. However, after he came to power, that number rose to 83%. Additionally, most of the country's citizens were employed by the government. If a person couldn't find work immediately after completing their education, Gaddafi would ensure that they received a salary equal to the assigned wage for the position until they found a job. He also provided scholarships to young educated Libyans to study in countries like the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom, covering their living expenses and car costs until they finished their studies. Additionally, he gave $3,000 per month to the families of these students to cover their living expenses. While studying abroad in London or the United States might have been a dream for us, for them it was very easy to achieve. Although most areas of Libya were desert, Gaddafi devised one of the largest irrigation projects to help the people farm. This project became the world’s largest human-made irrigation system and is recognized as the eighth wonder of the world. He provided farmers with free land, seeds, fertilizers, and agricultural equipment. Soon, he planned to introduce train services across the country. He also planned to transform cities like Tripoli, Benghazi, Misrata, Sabratha, and Al Khums into smart cities.

Soon, a plan was set to increase the amount of petrol available from 6 liters (which cost around 36-37 rupees in India at the time) to 10 liters. He also ordered a stipend of about 75 dinars (equivalent to around 3500 rupees in India at the time) per month for college students. Car factories were set to sell cars at a fixed price. When women gave birth, they were given $5,000 USD for the care of their child. From 1986 to 1998, Libya was subjected to economic sanctions for 12 years due to accusations that Gaddafi was supporting extremist activities in various parts of the world. During this period, Libya suffered immense losses. In such times, Gaddafi sought help from neighboring countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Algeria. These nations, which had friendly relations with Libya, agreed to help and provided the necessary resources, which Gaddafi exchanged at favorable rates to ensure the happiness of the Libyan people. Despite this, he never took loans from the IMF or the World Bank. He kept Libya economically independent without taking any loans. Recently, he advised oil-producing nations not to accept payments for oil in dollars or euros, but to instead accept gold. However, including the United States, many Western countries did not have enough gold to buy oil. If these nations had followed Gaddafi’s suggestion and bought oil with gold, it was likely that these countries would have faced bankruptcy. As a result, a revolution in Libya became inevitable, culminating in Gaddafi’s assassination. Photos: Courtesy of the Internet Kannada Original: Uday Itagi English Translation: Uday Itagi

1. In the Land of a Dictator, the Principle of Equality

When the Avadhi magazine team asked me to write about Libya, I was momentarily unsure of where to begin. Should I start with the line on a board at Tripoli's international airport that deeply resonated with the principle of equality when I first landed there? Or should I write about the incident from the second day, when I struggled to ask a taxi driver in English, “Where is the toilet?” because I didn’t know Arabic? Should I narrate how Libyans greet each other with phrases like “Salam Aleikum,” “Kaif Halal,” “Koais,” and proceed to ask about everyone’s well-being individually—"How are you? How is your father? How is your mother? How is your elder sister? Younger sister? Elder brother? Younger brother?"—and, in the end, even inquire about the sheep, chickens, and camels in your field, which we found amusing? Or should I describe how, underestimating their English skills, we entered a classroom only to be stunned by the fluency of some Libyans? Or should I write about the tribal communities here, who, unaffected by the intense influences of globalization, continue to live modern lives while preserving their values? Should I begin with the biting cold here, which chills to the bone despite sitting by heaters, or the scorching desert heat that feels unbearable? Whenever I ponder where to begin, my thoughts inevitably turn to Gaddafi. His grim end comes to mind. The 42 years of his rule, his ideologies, his downfall—how did someone like him meet such a fate? Libya and Gaddafi were synonymous. How could someone so prominent vanish into oblivion? Without writing about him first, what else about Libya could I write? Therefore, I start with him, intending to explore other topics after discussing his story. In 2007, I was selected as an English lecturer at the University of Sebha in Libya and left India to travel thousands of miles across the seas to this distant land. Friends and colleagues mocked me, saying, "Leaving our beautiful country, and of all places, going to an African nation? Are you out of your mind?" Does intellect or money differentiate between Africa, Europe, or Arab countries? I am someone who goes where my intellect is valued. For intellect and the earnings it brings, geography holds no barriers. I am neither a blind patriot who refuses opportunities just to cling to the notion that one must work only in their own country, nor am I the kind of person who would pretend to stay back in the name of patriotism because of a lack of opportunities. So, I answered their comments with a dismissive smile and flew here. Before leaving, countless people shared their opinions. One colleague declared with an air of authority, “Oh, Africa? That’s the end of your story! It’s a wretched continent. Why would you even go there?” Another cautioned, “Yellow fever, AIDS—it’s rampant there. Be careful!” Some expressed concern, saying, “There’s so much theft and murder there. Be cautious. Don’t venture out alone at night.” Others mocked, “If you want to go abroad, it should be to the UK, USA, Australia, or Europe. What joy is there in going to other countries?” A few warned, “It’s a country under the control of the autocratic Muammar Gaddafi. The conditions there aren’t great. Why are you even going?” Despite all this, who lets go of an opportunity when it comes knocking? I decided to go. Moreover, Gaddafi was known to be a controversial, eccentric figure—a man who stood up even against powerful nations like the United States. Such unconventional personalities are not only fascinating but often extraordinary achievers. I was curious to learn more about him up close. And I wanted to see for myself what life was like in a country led by someone who dared to challenge the likes of America. That curiosity brought me here. When I first landed at Tripoli International Airport in Libya, what immediately caught my attention was a signboard with an inscription. It was about the lower-tier workers and read: "Do not call them wage workers. They are your partners." Reading this, I was both surprised and sceptical: “What is this? A board like this in the land of a dictator? Could such an egalitarian principle actually exist here?” However, when I began working with Libyans, I realized that this wasn’t just an empty slogan on a board but a truth practiced in their daily lives. Here, everyone is treated equally. There is no hierarchy of “superior” and “subordinate,” nor is it permissible for a superior to dominate or oppress their juniors. From an attendant to the dean of a college, everyone is considered equal. An attendant could sit on the dean’s chair without hesitation, use the dean’s computer without seeking permission, or have coffee with him. Similarly, a dean is not bound by the notion that he must work only from his position of authority. If needed, he would walk to a clerk and get work done personally. And if the clerk were busy, the dean would wait until his task was completed. To those of us unaccustomed to such practices, it initially seemed strange. Over time, however, it became routine. I was amazed to see the head of the examination board (Controller of Examinations) sitting casually in a clerk’s room, chatting with him warmly. We wondered, “What is this? An officer in such a high-ranking position sitting and chatting with a junior in his chamber?” In fact, this is a concept that should exist in a so-called democratic country like ours (though it doesn’t). But to witness this in a nation under a dictator was astonishing. What’s more, the labor minister of the Ghāt region, where I worked, was one of my colleagues. Despite being a minister, he had no special government car or privileges. He came to the college in his own car, without any security or escort, taught classes, and left. Even in banks and government offices, he received no special treatment. Like everyone else, he stood in line and completed his tasks. At times, when his car broke down, he would walk to the college, teach, and leave. How was such a concept of equality possible in a dictator’s country? While pondering this, I came across a book in the college library titled The Green Book, which detailed Gaddafi’s social, economic, and political ideologies. Reading it answered all my questions. I was astonished by his ideas. Gaddafi didn’t just write about these concepts but implemented them practically, embedding the principle of equality deeply into the minds of the people.

If Gaddafi preached such socialist principles, why didn’t he relinquish his throne easily and avoid meeting such a tragic end? The unfortunate reality is that Gaddafi was portrayed as a villain by all global media, including Kannada media, from the very beginning. Sitting far away, we tend to believe everything these English channels tell us as the truth. However, if you come here and ask the people, you’ll hear a completely different story. They curse these English channels vehemently. According to them, these channels are bogus and biased, working solely in favour of Americans and Europeans. What most people don’t know—and what the media never revealed—is that as the revolution in Libya escalated, Gaddafi invited some rebel leaders and said, “Alright, I will step down from power. Let’s conduct elections as you suggest. Whoever wins the elections can take over the government.” However, the rebels knew very well that if Gaddafi contested in the elections, he would undoubtedly win. Therefore, they refused his proposal, declaring, “No, we will fight and win through revolution.” At the same time, the U.S. and its allies, who were waiting for this opportunity, extended their support to the rebels. This led to a full-fledged revolution in Libya. Eventually, they brought down a powerful dictator, completely eradicating his influence and celebrating their victory with pride.

But come here and have a casual conversation with the locals about this matter, and you’ll get a completely different perspective. They paint an entirely different picture: "The revolution had America’s involvement behind it. They always harbored hatred for Gaddafi and had their eyes on Libya’s oil reserves. Back in 1988, Libya was accused of bombing the Pan Am flight over Scotland. Around 250 Americans lost their lives in that incident. Gaddafi denied involvement for a long time. As a result, America imposed sanctions on Libya for 12 years. Eventually, Gaddafi handed over the accused to them and paid compensation of around $2.7 billion to the victims' families. However, a year before the revolution broke out, Gaddafi demanded that the U.S. government compensate Libya for the losses suffered during the sanctions period. He even warned that he would shut down operations of U.S. oil companies in Libya if they didn’t comply. But the U.S. government, as usual, ignored his warnings. Enraged, Gaddafi followed through on his threat. In October, three months before the revolution began, he shut down American companies operating in Libya. This infuriated the Americans." Here’s another piece of information you should know. Until 1943, Libya was under Italian control. However, after Italy's defeat in World War II, Libya came under the administration of the Allied forces. Later, on December 24, 1951, Libya was freed from all such subjugation and declared an independent nation, with the rulers appointing a king of their choice. King Idris became a mere puppet in their hands. However, in 1969, when Gaddafi came to power and solidified his dominance in Libya, he demanded compensation from the Italians for occupying the country for 35 years and exploiting its resources. Although Italy rejected the demand for a long time, Gaddafi, through his strategic maneuvering, gradually made them entirely dependent on Libya for oil and gas. Then, just three years before the revolution in Libya, Gaddafi backed Italy into a corner by threatening to terminate their oil agreements unless they compensated Libya for exploiting its resources. For Italy, sourcing oil from Libya was extremely cost-effective due to its proximity. If the agreements were broken, they would have had to import oil from distant countries, which would have been prohibitively expensive. After weighing their options, Italy reluctantly decided that continuing trade with Libya was the better choice. Gaddafi offered a deal: they could continue the trade by paying Libya $320 billion annually as compensation. Though seething with anger internally, Italy had no choice but to accept his terms. As per the agreement, Italy paid compensation to Libya for three years leading up to the revolution. This imposed a heavy financial and political burden on Italy, causing a significant dent in their economy and prestige. Consequently, they waited for the right time to bring Gaddafi down.

Moreover, some of the ambitious projects Gaddafi was about to implement posed a significant threat to their economic interests. Gaddafi had devised several plans to redirect trade and goods passing through the Tripoli seaport, ensuring that these goods would instead be sold in the soon-to-be-established Tripoli free market. This would have caused massive losses to the markets of America and European countries. If this had continued, Gaddafi would have become a major threat to both American and European economies. Additionally, he had plans to establish extensive railway networks across Libya, elevate Benghazi to the ranks of the world’s most beautiful cities, and build an airport in Tripoli even larger than Dubai’s. These were just a few among many other ambitious projects he had in mind. From the moment Gaddafi came to power, his first move was to remove the American military base that had been stationed in Libya since the reign of King Idris. This naturally enraged the Americans, and they began spreading rumors about him, waiting patiently for the right moment to act. Eventually, NATO saw eliminating him as the only way to secure their interests and carried out the mission. When questioned about NATO’s involvement in Gaddafi’s death, the response often came with a smirk: “This was all pre-planned. NATO was aware of Gaddafi’s habit of changing his hideouts. They tracked him down and tipped off the rebels, guiding them to capture and kill him. Gaddafi was last seen fleeing from his convoy in Sirte. NATO dropped a small bomb near his vehicle, forcing him to flee and hide in a drainage pipe under the road. It was from there that the rebels captured and tortured him to death, presenting it to the world as an act of his people rising against him.” Tears accompany these words as they lament: “Gaddafi safeguarded Libya’s oil wealth for his people. Now, all that wealth is in the hands of America, France, Britain, and Italy.” They then reveal another unsettling truth: America viewed three powerful African leaders as obstacles to their dominance and systematically removed them. These leaders were Iraq’s Saddam Hussein, Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, and Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. While they succeeded in toppling the first two, their hunt for the third continues. This is why the revolution in Syria is yet to settle. These leaders refused to bow to America’s demands or succumb to their influence, and for this reason, each was targeted and eliminated one by one, exposing the motives behind America's actions. If you ask, “Wasn’t it your own people who revolted against Gaddafi? Then why do you blame the Americans?” the response is, “This was all a conspiracy by the Americans. Only 9% of the people actually revolted. They are crazy! They lack sense. It was the Americans who gave them money and incited them. Gaddafi was doing everything he could to suppress them. But the Americans were waiting for this opportunity, and they supported the rebels, ultimately succeeding in overthrowing Gaddafi,” they lament. While Gaddafi may have appeared as a villain to the outside world, he was seen as a tragic leader by those here. Today, Gaddafi is no longer in Libya. But the essence of “Gaddafism” still remains. The concept of equality he instilled in the people’s minds continues to exist. A person can be erased easily, but can his ideals be erased just as easily? Photos: Photo 1: Libya's old flag, now claimed to be the "new" one Photo 2: The author at the Mediterranean coastline Photo 3: The demolished home of Gaddafi Kannada Original: Uday Itagi English Translation: Uday Itagi

My Libya Diary in English Translation....

I translated my Libya Diary book into English about two years ago. Now, I am publishing it on my blog. In the context of the ongoing conflict between Iran, Israel, and the United States, if you read this, you may be able to understand the strategies of the United States and the kinds of issues caused by Israel in the world.Tomorrow onwards it will be published here. Please read it and share your opinion.

VIS School Annual Report

https://youtu.be/IzBd__U8EXg?si=bCHkW7ix6Shdi-pS