Philosophers and scientists have proposed theories of duality as the propelling force of movement and progress.
The philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel's dialectic, which is subject to many interpretations, offered a process of change in which opposition between two interacting forces creates a thesis and antithesis to form a new synthesis.
Physicist Isaac Newton demonstrated that in the Laws of Motion every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
The Chinese concept of Ying and Yang describes contrary forces as interconnected and interdependent in the natural world. The forces enable one another, and thus opposites only exist in relation to each other.
Has the inability to note the relevance of the scientific and social notions of duality to the historical and political forces that guide the planet limited the ability of political leaders to resolve dilemmas?
By usually reacting to an action that represents a challenge to an existing policy and provoking a counter challenge, U.S. foreign policy follows the doctrine of duality - except for one factor - progress is frequently backwards. Exempting the Cold War, U.S. State Department history of the last sixty years proceeded with constant action and reaction and rarely with satisfactory outcomes. Moammar Gadhafi and his challenges to western dominance are a subset of the duality theorem. Would Gadhafi the authoritative, Gadhafi, the self-chosen defender of the world's dominated, and Gadhafi the conspirator exist if the western nations, most represented by the United States, treated The Third World fairly and did not interfere in the affairs of other nations for their own interests? It is unlikely he would have any raison d'Ãªtre.
Colonel Gadhafi took power after Italy occupied his nation from 1911-1943, after nations during World War II turned Libya into a major battleground for their own pursuits, and after Udris I became the first and only King of Libya in a constitutional monarchy with inheritance privileges. Britain 's Prime minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkhozy exhibited a lack of internal thought and an excess of external hypocrisy when they demanded Colonel Gadhafi step down and face justice. Don't they know that by self-crafting of nations and borders and selection of leaders after World War I, attacks on Arab peoples throughout the 20th century, support of dictatorial and corrupt Arab regimes, and by spurious rhetoric of self-determination after World War II, France and Britain had significant roles in causing the Middle East problems and enabling the emergence of authoritative leaders such as Moammar Gadhafi?
History reveals the duplicity of western policy towards Libya . Beginning with banning military equipment sales to Libya in 1978, continuous and growing sanctions by U.S. administrations provoked several murderous actions and reactions with the Libyan leader. Due to Gadhafi's refusal to hand over two suspects that the sovereign nation of Libya had arrested in connection with the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, that killed 270 civilians, the United Nations instituted its own sanctions on Libya in 1992. By 1995, the International Herald Tribune, 14 October 1995 , reported on Libya 's assessment "that UN sanctions are taking a tragic toll on the country, costing $19 billion and causing as many as 21,000 deaths in the past three and a half years. Libya claims agriculture is the hardest-hit sector, with losses estimated at $5.9 billion." After the deadly sanctions moved Libya to hand over the Lockerbie bombing suspects, the 1999 UN suspended the sanctions that had decreased exports, inhibited imports, increased prices of goods and prevented many Libyans from studying and working abroad. The UN formally lifted the sanctions in 2003;
United States , similar to its dealings with Iraq and Cuba , invoked sanctions with the intention of bringing about the downfall of the pariah, but as in Cuba and Iraq , only served to pauper the pariah's people. In 2004, Gadhafi halted developments in weapons of mass destruction, took responsibility for compensating victims of terrorist bombings and pledged to change his ways. Sanctions ceased, oil flowed and Libya embarked on a surge of domestic projects that monotonically increased the Libyan standard of living.
After the United States sanctions denied the Libyan people the living standards their oil wealth could have given them, after Libya started to recover from the embargo, and after Gadhafi and the U.S. cooperated, the U.S. is once again imposing its will on Libya and attempting to cripple its economy; in effect telling the Libyans they have no future with any Gadhafi.
Maybe Moammar Gadhafi needs to be deposed, and much of the world seems disposed to that concept, but before disposal isn't knowledge of the replacement and a process for orderly transition a requirement? Without the latter in place, Libya could posit anarchy or resemble post-Saddam Iraq . Alternatively, maybe it does not matter.
In a nation that depends on one resource for its wealth, the people are less interested in the political framework and its leader, and more interested in the wise use and equitable distribution of the wealth derived from the petroleum.
A 2008 article in Libyan newspaper The Tripoli Post describes a meeting at which Moammar Gadhafi discussed the issue.
On the Distribution of Wealth in Libya by Sami Zaptia, 22/11/2008
On Wednesday October 12, the Leader of the Revolution Muammar Al-Qathafi met with the Secretariat of the General People's Congress and the Secretariat of the General People's Committee and discussed the issue of the distribution of Libya 's wealth and its consequences. In the lively debate that followed, which was broadcast live on Libyan TV, different views on this issue were freely discussed.
Those who have reservations on the re-distribution of wealth, and specifically the abolition of some bureaucracies or General People's Committees (ministries) was based on: the fear of short term economic chaos, hyper inflation, loss of the dinar value, uncontrolled consumption and frittering away of the oil income on consumer products, a balance of payments deficit and a real fall in the incomes of people. They stressed that the oil money ought to be centrally invested in long term projects and investment portfolios on behalf of the Libyan people to increase production, long term growth and development. However, history and the track record of centralized bureaucracy and administrators are not good. The General People's Committees and administrators have had much time and even much more money to try and fix things - and they seem to have failed.
I therefore fully agree with the Leader of the Revolution Muammar from the point of view that the Libyan people cannot accept the present status quo. The country must continue, and accelerate, the re-distribution of wealth amongst Libyan citizens if we are really going to be faithful to the ideals of the Green Book and our system of true democracy.
There has been increased oil production, increased oil income and Libya 's general non-oil income has increased. There are new and increased income flows from investments and portfolios. Moreover, Libyans' expectations have risen, are rising and continue to rise. They see all these signboards going up and construction projects going on all over Libya . They note these new towers, hotels, offices, marinas, railways, metros, and leisure complexes being constructed. They say to themselves there must be a lot of money about and ask when is it going to trickle down to them. And they are right. There is much money about. There are huge and increasing annual budgets. Libya 's GDP for 2006 was about US$68 billion (PPP) and is estimated at US$ 83 billion plus for 2008. That is a per capita income of over 8,000 for 2006 and estimated at over 12,000 for 2008. Libya 's real unemployment level is estimated at 30% whilst that of Dubai is only 2.4% Moreover, 33% of Libya 's population is under 15 years of age. This young population is full of expectations and needs vital investment in education, health and all the other sectors.
Hence The Leader of the Revolution Muammar Al-Qathafi is absolutely right. We must continue to improve and increase our unique brand of democracy. We must continue to improve and increase the accountability of Secretaries of General People's Committees, improve and increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the management and distribute and re-distribute the increasing wealth for the sake of fairness and social cohesion and stability. The public demands a better health system and a better education system.
A compromise must be found between continuing the unacceptable status quo of poor economic management, poor economic administration, poor economic planning, lack of administrative accountability and administrative corruption on the one hand, and the chaos that might follow the abolition of GPCs (ministries) on the other.