Muammar Gaddafi was talking about a possible US invasion. He told his TV audience that, if necessary, Libyans could go back to living in the desert. Besides, the Americans had better factor in the heat. If the Russians had “General Winter” to help them against invaders then the Libyans had “General Heat”.
Col Gaddafi gave that speech 19 years ago, on the eve of the introduction of UN sanctions against Libya. I followed it while playing cards with Libyan friends in Bani Walid, the centre of the Warfalla tribe. No one – there were about 100 men in the large reception room – paid too much attention to the invocation of “General Heat”, which seemed improvised. The playing cards flew furiously while, on TV, Col Gaddafi grinned at his serendipity.
That offhand joke about the weather is today a grave military consideration. Last week’s disruption of Nato actions by a southern wind was no accident. The sandstorm season is approaching.
The implications go beyond Misurata. On Monday, a spokesman for that city said it would probably fall within three days if Nato did not offer further help. However, the battle for Ajdabiya – gateway to Benghazi – has again resumed in earnest. Much of the town’s civilian population has reportedly fled. If Ajdabiya falls, sandstorms could provide cover for an advance to Benghazi itself.
That prospect is changing the very nature of the conflict in Libya. This week, a blustering rebel, interviewed by Al Jazeera’s Arabic channel, spoke of how his comrades were going to liberate Libya. But, according to Nicolas Pelham (in the current New York Review of Books), many rebels in Benghazi are scaling back their ambitions as they face up to their inability to defeat Col Gaddafi’s forces on their own.
Even some jihadis are now prepared to permit Western intelligence officers on the territory if that would establish that Al Qaeda is not involved in the rebellion. (Mr Pelham reports that the Libyan jihadis claim to have broken with Al Qaeda some time ago.)
In other quarters, there is even criticism that negotiations for a ceasefire are not being conducted seriously. The hope here is that a ceasefire would divide the country – previously an absolute taboo – and grant autonomy to the rebel-held east.
If the agents of Col Gaddafi in Benghazi had already reported such sentiments to Tripoli, it would explain why Saif al-Islam Gaddafi was so bullish in his interview with the Washington Post published on Monday, saying any democratisation in the country would follow only after the rebels had been dealt with.
For, just as the city of Tripoli is under strong economic pressure – of self-imposed curfews, shortages and rations, unpaid salaries and limits on bank withdrawals – so too is Benghazi fast approaching the limits of its current political dispensation.
After the city fell into rebel hands, for the first month or so, the city was fuelled by the joys of freedom of expression and a volunteer culture. Graffiti of the Colonel sprouted exuberantly, with some cartoonists acquiring renown; men, women and children had themselves photographed beside some of the most defiant slogans. And where services had shut down, because workers had fled or (as in the case of the police) disappeared, volunteers took over.
Students directed traffic, some youths learned how to bake bread, rubbish was collected off the streets.
The city bloomed as it had not done for years.
But this volunteer culture was always dependent on enthusiasm, not to mention the clock. People only had time to volunteer as long as the city’s cash reserves did not run out and as long as enthusiasm was fuelled by success on the front.
Now, the cash flow problem is coming to a head: Qatar’s readiness to buy Libyan oil (as well as recognition by France and Italy) was helpful but oil production itself has been disturbed. Rubbish is still being collected in the main squares but not in the side streets. The city still enjoys a night life but there is growing criticism of youthful partying: the waste of resources, the escapism from military duty. And, as things grow critical, there is bickering among the leaders, both military and political.
In such a context, one can see why the rebels themselves may begin to clamour for a ceasefire, to gain some respite and preserve what they have. If they do that, the argument within Nato itself would probably turn decisively against France and the UK, the strongest champions of the intensification of Nato’s involvement.
Barack Obama, Nicolas Sarkozy and David Cameron all have much to lose if Col Gaddafi survives. However, the first two face uneasy re-election campaigns next year while Mr Cameron’s governing alliance is set to take a blow after a domestic referendum in early May. Deciding which is, in domestic terms, the riskier option – getting bogged down in Libya or cutting it loose – is going to be a defining decision each will have to take in the coming weeks.
ranierfsadni@europe.com