Whose silly season is it?

Countries do not get to pick their neighbours but they can choose how to behave with them. As the scars of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict or the Iran/Iraq war showed, it pays to try have good relations with neighbouring states, even if their leaders have questionable credentials.

The problem arises when governments treat their despotic neighbours in a servile manner or when they do not question their tactics or moments of madness.

Where Muammar Gaddafi is concerned, both the Labour and Nationalist governments are guilty of omission to a certain extent.

It was therefore absurd, almost sad, to see both parties engaged in an infantile finger-pointing exercise during the past week to try to prove their political opponents were the real bedfellows of Gaddafi. Each pot calling the other black.

It would be a mistake to dismiss the historical perspective as to why it was in the national interest for our leaders to befriend Col Gaddafi from 1969 all the way through 2011.

Dom Mintoff may have truly believed he acted in the national interest when he sought to siphon off funds from Col Gaddafi as the Maltese government turned its back on Britain.

What was wrong was the manner in which the Socialists went to every length Libyan colonel to impress him, inviting him to address mass meetings, handing over buildings to him, distributing his Green Book to Maltese citizens, and even introduce compulsory Arabic in Maltese schools.

In the 1970s Malta became servile to Libya.

Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici took over the baton and was at the southern master’s beck and call, even when Col Gaddafibecame known as the “mad dog” of the Middle East.

Despite toning down the intensity of relations, the Nationalists never missed a chance to highlight the “excellent” relationship with our Libyan neighbours.

The Nationalist government pinned another medal of honour onto Gaddafi’s jacket, echoing the Western World’s decision to bring the Libyan leader in from the cold.

Maltese business and trade with Libya did well, but there was always the unspoken fear that the impetuous Col Gaddafi could bring the “excellent” relations to an abrupt end on a whim.

Worse in the last few years was the way the government consistently justified Libya’s actions and tactics where irregular immigration was concerned, even when Col Gaddafi shamelessly threatened to turn Europe “black” if he wasn’t given millions of euros.

The Maltese government silently applauded the disgraceful pushback agreement between Italy and Libya to turn back all asylum seekers to a country which refused to acknowledge refugee rights.

Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi thankfully did not emulate Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi (who last year stopped so low to kiss the Libyan leader’s hand), but his visit to Tripoli just days before the uprising was so ill-advised.

Thankfully, the Maltese government soon decided to be on the right side of history while the Labour Party conveniently failed to strongly condemn Col Gaddafi’s tenure or atrocities during the past six months... just in case.

So what happens now? Do we try to nurture an excellent relationship with Libya’s next leaders? The answer is a resounding yes - but not at the expense of human rights and at the risk of becoming servile to what will hopefully not be another despotic regime.