Rebel troops in Libya. February 27, 2011. Photo credit: Freak Frame

The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor has cited evidence that Libyan leader Col Muammar Gaddafi ordered the use of mass rape as a weapon against rebel forces. Luis Moreno-Ocampo is particularly investigating claims that Gaddafi provided Viagra-type drugs to Libyan soldiers to promote the rape of hundreds of women during the current conflict.  Moreno-Ocampo told a news conference on Wednesday that some witnesses have confirmed the Libyan government was buying containers of the drugs to carry out the policy, and “to enhance the possibility to rape.” Here, the commentators get to grips with the charges, examine their veracity, and try to imagine a post-Gaddafi world.

  • Did Gaddafi personally authorize rape? As the Jerusalem Post reported, the rape allegations are not new. The issue was first raised in the UN Security Council in April by US Ambassador Susan Rice, who said some of Gaddafi’s troops had been issued with Viagra. But at the news conference on Wednesday, Moreno-Ocampo explained that, until recently, the question had been whether Gaddafi himself could be associated with the rapes “or is it something that happened in the barracks?” But, Ocampo added, “now we are getting some information that Gaddafi himself decided” to authorize the rapes, “and this is new.” Ocampo explained that this was not a “pattern” Gaddafi had ever used before to repress the population.
  • Are the allegations true? Andrew Harding, the BBC’s Africa correspondent, interviewed two young members of Gaddafi’s forces who are prisoners in a detention centre in the rebel-held city of Misrata. He asked them whether a systematic campaign of rape was carried out by Gaddafi’s forces. They replied “yes,” and admitted that they took part in the gang-rape of four women. However, Harding was keen to remind readers that it is in the rebels’ interest to portray Gaddafi’s forces in the worst possible light, and it is possible that these prisoners were coerced into telling lies. “And there is a big difference between individual acts of violence committed during wartime and a systematic campaign to target civilians.” But above all, Harding decided, “My impression was that the men were telling the truth.”
  • So why have there been no official complaints? Harding also explained that the rebel authorities in Misrata believe there may be hundreds of victims, but so far no-one has made an official complaint. This may be because the city’s phone network is down and communications are slow, pondered Harding. Or it may be because the number of rapes are “far smaller” than officials are suggesting. But perhaps the most significant factor, suggested Harding, “is the extremely conservative culture in Libya – and in Misrata in particular” – which regards rape as a matter of “profound shame” for an entire family, and cannot be mentioned in public. Harding suggested that proof of the rapes can be found in reports of rebel fighters offering to marry the rape victims, “to spare their families from shame”. And in a number of “rape videos”, recorded by Gaddafi’s soldiers on their mobile phones, which are now circulating in Misrata. “I have confirmed the existence of at least one, which was seen by a trusted colleague,” he said.
  • What will we do with scarred post-Gaddafi Libya? The “creaking at the top” of Gaddafi’s regime should focus our minds on how to manage the transition to peace, should Gaddafi fall, advised the Financial Times. “A Libyan solution” would in many ways be preferable to an alien political arrangement that is forced upon the country by external actors. After all, “A settlement that went with the grain of indigenous society would be more likely to command legitimacy and respect.” But for this to work, funds must be released “to give the transition a chance to play out and prevent any descent into chaos.” There are approximately $100bn of Libyan assets offshore, which could fund the transition and reconstruction the country needs. The priority is that the UN lift its sanctions, to allow these funds back into the country. “Gaddafi’s idea of Libya as a primitive tribal society was always a myth. It is one of Africa’s wealthiest and most educated societies,” explained the FT. And this gives hope that a post-Gaddafi Libya would not descend into the chaos of post-Saddam Iraq.
  • Why it’s so tough to get Gaddafi to quit. At Foreign Policy, Niel Byman and Matthew Waxman pondered the “familiar predicament”: Why, despite possessing overwhelming military superiority over any foe, does the US “have such a hard time using the threat of force to push much weaker dictators around?” The short answer, explained the authors, is that political constraints often bind the US and its coalition partners much more tightly than their adversaries, “and in ways that offset advantages in raw military power.” This is certainly the case in Libya today and helps explain why Gaddafi “isn’t flinching against the world’s most sophisticated military forces — despite his near-complete international isolation.” The authors outlined in detail how asymmetrical stakes, coup-proofing, coalition management, and casualty sensitivity, are all working in Gaddafi’s favour. They explained that, like any battle of wills, “perception is everything.” For Gaddafi’s regime to yield, it’s not enough for the coalition to sustain the pressure. “Gaddafi has to believe that the coalition will do so.”

Read more: