Tiananmen in Colonel Gaddafi’s speech
Colonel Gaddafi’s public appearance on Libyan state television on February 22 looked like the last act of a forty-two year long drama – endured by ordinary Libyans for far too long. Even seasoned old Libya experts judged his stage performance a bit more bizarre even than usual: signs of desperation and insight about the end of him and his regime.
Bizarre reference to the 1989 Tiananmen Square democracy movement
In the midst of all the tirades against the demonstrators and descriptions of them as “cockroaches” and “rats” he also invoked the legacy of Tiananmen Square in Beijing. He said, “The unity of China was more important than the people on Tiananmen Square.” It was bizarre because Gaddafi apparently thought that the memory of the Tiananmen massacre would serve him as a potent rhetorical weapon. It makes me wonder how many of the colonel’s (former) Libyan subjects got to know about the killings of students, workers, and ordinary Beijingers on the night between the third and fourth of June 1989 – through state-controlled Libyan mass media when it occurred. If it was reported at all, I guess it was only in the way of concise condemnation of a counterrevolutionary uprising that was rightfully crushed by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), efficiently controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Did Gaddafi really believe that during the 22 years that have passed since the tragic event of Tiananmen 1989, Libyans had not gotten any alternative news or information about what actually did occur?
Just across the border in Egypt, at the height of the civilian protests at Tahrir Square in central Cairo, a high-ranking official also referred to the Tiananmen massacre – but as a negative example, the symbol of a horrific worst-case scenario on many people’s minds inside and outside Egypt: “There will never be a Tiananmen crack-down in Cairo.”
Tiananmen as collective memory and global symbol
As I wrote in an earlier blog post, “Comparing Egypt, China, and T-square crackdowns,” the Tiananmen Square massacre is not just a national Chinese trauma. It is also a global symbol of illegitimate regime oppression and violent crackdown on civilian protesters. The Tiananmen Square has become such a frightening symbol globally, including regions of the world long controlled by dictators and autocrats. That colonel Gaddafi, like a modern day Caligula, is out of touch with realities and sentiments is perhaps news to no one. But his use of Tiananmen Square massacre in his televised speech on 22 February made that clearer than ever.
The memory of Tiananmen continues to haunt collective memories worldwide. No matter how hard governments have tried to censor, forget or re-write the narrative of the Chinese democracy movement and the CCP elders’ decision to crush the movement and peaceful protestors with machine-guns and tanks in the heart of China’s political and cultural capital, what really happened on June Fourth is a living scar and hard-to-forget memory for hardliners and citizen activists throughout the world. And it is quite likely that, although it is one of the most sensitive things to discuss inside China, it will not go away completely from the Chinese collective memory either.
Anyhow, Libyans seem undeterred, and if anything, were angered by his referring to Tiananmen and the prospect of innocent civilian protestors being killed for maintaining the unity of Libya – and the prolonging of Gaddafi’s four decades of rule. People are still scared and there are reports of snipers shooting women on balconies, yet other people continue to take to the streets to defend their families and neighborhoods. And at the time of writing, foreign mercenaries or people loyal to the colonel, no longer controls the Eastern part of Libya on the Egyptian border. (See: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12564104).
Invoking Tiananmen did not help him. The colonel is apparently facing his last stand in a Tripoli bunker.
Hi Johan,
Very interesting post (esp. in conjunction with your earlier “T-square” observations) but I wonder if there isn’t some narrative of Tiananmen as an unfortunate but necessary squelching of destabilizing dissent taking root out there in the managed democracies. In situations where the opposition may not have succeeded (yet) in tapping into grassroots frustrations or can even (as in Russia) be scapegoated for having fostered instability while previously in power, I wonder if autocrats may feel that Tiananmen could be sold as a quick and unfortunate but necessary way of preempting situations of protracted social instability?
Best,
R
Hi R:
Thanks for your comment. I think you are right in pointing out the fact that there is a continuum of ideas that have taken hold in autocracies, illiberal/controlled democracies, and even in some extremist quarters in established democracies that Tiananmen was in fact “a lesser evil” than would have been the case if all social forces had been let loose.
I still dont understand your post entirely. Gadaffi is making a comparison that if China was allowed to quell its citizens as it sees fit with no outside force, why must USA, France and Britain see fit to flex their muscle here?
Might it not seem these these ‘bullies’ can pick on Libya but not China?
I think whilst Gadaffi is a madmen you fail to analyze at all what he is inferring. Did USA send any air strikes to China? Did Britain or France?
Thanks for your comment Alfonzo.
I did not read Gaddafi’s reference to Tiananmen in that way. If the west did not interfere in China’s internal affairs in 1989, does that mean that it should not interfere this time? Since June 4, 1989, the world has witnessed the Rwandan genocide and the specter of Srebrenica in Bosnia-Herzegovina. After that disaster, ethnic cleansing could not be allowed to happen. So the norm “responsibility to protect” grew stronger. In the international community. Note that although China has condemned the French and British airstrikes, the PRC did not veto a no-fly zone in Libya in the UN security council this time. And seriously, I don’t think we should mourn the fact that Gaddafi may not be able to massacre opposition to his rule — in the way that the Chinese hardliners did . You are right though in pointing out an element of hypocrisy. Why doesn’t the west pick fights with Russia or China over their minority politics. Great power status matters a lot.