Khadafi at UN
Libyan Leader Muammar Khadafi made a historic speech
at the 64th Session of the United Nations General Assembly. The
speech is significant for several reasons.
Firstly, it is the first time in the 40 year history of new
Libya that he has attended the United Nations General Assembly.
The visit is historic for that very reason.
Secondly, he was speaking not only as the Libyan leader but
also as the President of the African Union. In that sense his
voice was symbolic of the voice of Africa, the poor but rich
continent. It's poor because of colonial exploitation. It's rich
because of its vast physical resources.
Thirdly, what gives weight to his speech is that its content
included the aspirations of the Third World countries as a
whole.
Fourthly, there was more than a grain of truth in his
pronouncements.
He did not mince his words. Nor did he spare any one. He
pointed out that the United Nations has failed to prevent 65
wars that took place after it was formed. He questioned the
rationality of the veto held by permanent members of the
Security Council. In fact, the Security Council which reflected
the geo-political power structure 64 years ago has become an
anachronism long ago. New and emerging nations have risen on the
world's horizon and they remain unrepresented.
Khadafi faulted the Security Council for usurping the rights
of the General Assembly which is the most representative body.
His call for more powers to the General Assembly and wider
representation at the Security Council would surely receive the
support of the majority of UN members.
On behalf of the African Union he called upon its colonizers
to repatriate the colonial loot amounting to US $ 7.7 trillion.
Obviously his speech has hurt those who want to preserve the
status quo. The Western media has joined their leaders in
ridiculing Khadafi for his "un-ceremonial" behaviour at the UN.
They have forgotten that the United Nations General Assembly is
not a sacrosanct place of religious worship but a political
forum. Nor is it an academic symposium.
It is only such emotional and forceful speeches that liven
the General Assembly debate which is dull and monotonous most of
the time with only the speaker's country delegation listening.
That's why speakers like Fidel Castro, Barack Obama, and Hugo
Chavez could get a full house audience.
To find fault with a politician for being emotional is both
absurd and stupid. Colonel Khadafi, the people's politician he
is could not but express his thoughts emotionally. These very
same media and others had not only silently witnessed but also
loudly hailed emotive outbursts of the ilk of George W. Bush at
the UN podium.
One should not forget that these emotive outbursts of the
Western media are also politically motivated. (It would be
impossible to find an apolitical media man) It is only the
anti-Western politicians that get berated by them.
It is unfair to single out the Western media. There are also
their cousins in the Third World, including in Sri Lanka that
for various reasons would like to take a dig at Khadafi to
achieve their political aims much closer home. As far as we are
concerned we could only say "Well said, Khadafi".
Women and politics
There is good news from the legislature. According to
the amendments to the Elections Ordinance, more positions are to
be given to women in legislative bodies. Needless to say women
representation in our representative bodies is dismally low. In
this respect Sri Lanka is even far behind some African
countries.
Though it is often quoted with pride that Sri Lanka produced
the world's first Prime Minister and the first woman President
Sri Lankan women's position in the political arena is minimal.
Even the few women who have made it up to the legislature have
done so in most cases due to voids caused at electoral level by
the demise of their family members who happen to be in the
legislature. That means their place in the political hierarchy
is rather circumstantial. However, it is to the credit of these
women MPs that they performed their parliamentary duties
exemplarily. Patriarchy prevails everywhere, even in the domains
of the "radical" Left. It is high time to take a radical
departure by affording women their due place in all spheres.
We cannot claim to be a pinnacle of democracy while confining
half the population to the backyard. In fact, the level of
women's participation in social life, including politics is an
indication of the level of development of a country. It is also
a mirror of its political democracy.
Democracy cannot be limited to the exercise of universal
suffrage. The populace should also actively engage in political
and social life of the society. That is why the new amendment,
however limited in its scope is a step in the right direction.
|