Due to the utter failure of Western leaders to use proper diplomatic resources to prevent such an outcome, Libya has been left a wreck, both physically and civilly.
As the jubilation at the rebel forces' entrance to Tripoli crescendos and the anticipation at the probable imminent fall of Colonel Ghadafi keeps their adrenalin high, we witness the disconcerting gloating and self-congratulation of Western leaders, - and their vying for who was the instigator of support for the rebels and the best friends of the government to be.
But in the cold light of day, before us is a country destroyed, looting is rife, old scores are being settled, the witch hunts, the torture and summary killings, the extremists are vying for power, the body count of the conflict, what an aftermath the Libyan people are waking to.
The reality is already setting in; of the reckoning of bloody revolution; there is an infirmity of nations born of bloodshed, the truth is there is unlikely to be real democracy or freedom for a very long time as a result of the violence and bloodshed. - And, as I have written elsewhere since the beginning of the so-called Arab Spring, it was all, perhaps, unnecessary:
Arab culture reveres politeness. Arabs find impoliteness a major affront; enough to go to war over it.... The British Diplomatic Corp was respected especially throughout Arabia. Hundreds of years of diplomacy meant that even if Arabs did not like what they were being edged towards by Britain, they respected why the decision was made, that it was believed by Britain to be for good reason, and how it was presented and to be implemented.
However, diplomacy was torn up by Tony Blair when he was Prime Minister. He was not going to be told that what he was doing was wrong, and he resented the 'class' that politeness and diplomacy and chivalry stands with. As for the USA and France, they never have had much skill at real diplomacy; it always meant the other party looking down the barrel of a gun!
The fact remains that Ghadafi has out-witted the West many times (including in the release of, the still-living, Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi). (Some incidents are not for Libya to be proud of, the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, Lockerbie, etc.) Yet in 2004, Mr Ghadafi became the sweetheart of Tony Blair and other Western leaders, who fell over themselves to be the first to shake Ghadafi's hand , and to "welcome him back into the international family". Ghadafi had seen that the world was changing: so he offered to give-up his weapons of mass destruction and to forgo research and attempts to acquire atomic energy knowledge and development of nuclear projects.
Muammar Ghadafi showed himself to be quite capable of adapting. It appears that leading Libya was like a game to him, that gave him pleasure and fun: it is all he wanted to do; to be the 'beloved' leader of Libya; the big father of the nation, the big brother of the people.
He showed time and again, that he was prepared to go to great lengths (not only by force, but also by providing some of the best medical care in the world) to preserve his position, and by it he showed that he was flexible and resourceful, and adaptable to changing circumstances. He, like many Arab leaders, was caught by surprise at the speed of change of the Arab Spring (in just a matter of months) due to the Western fanning of that change. Of course he was going to react violently to suppress that threat to him. It was naïve, to say the least, of any Western leader not to recognise that would be the outcome of their irresponsible encouragement of the protests and uprisings. But he is wily enough that had the West asked him to change and offered to help, instead of telling him to change and encouraging the populace to overthrow him, then probably not a single drop of blood would have been shed, and Libyan cities would still be standing to benefit the Libyan people, instead of the wreckage they find themselves in to the benefit of foreign companies that will offer to rebuild them.
Ghadafi has had a career of more than forty years as active head of state of Libya; examining his behaviour of recent years, he was ready to relax: reading him, then one can interpolate that, if he could have remained the figure head, he would have been happy without control or real power, and a peaceful transition to freedom and democracy could have been effected to everyone's satisfaction in Libya - if not the West.....
And All Africa herself has, in her love-hate relationship with Ghadafi, a lot to thank him for; in being the bulwark of the African Union, against occasions when the West has wanted to gain a military foothold on the continent through having UN forces in place of those of the AU.
Immaturity and the lack of other experience mean that Cameron and Clegg, Sarkozy and Obama, have eschewed diplomacy. The Diplomatic corp itself is reduced and lacking the strength and confidence to bring common-sense to prevail upon the actions of gung -ho prime ministers and presidents: - who sound just as mad as Ghadafi.
People the world over revile and were disturbed by the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, but have been comforted that lessons had been learnt so that it would be unlikely to happen again. There is unease that Western involvement has more to do with Libya's oil than the freedom of its people, remembering that Sri Lankan Tamils and Palestinians are left to suffer extreme oppression and even genocide, and coincidently appear to have no oil to protect. The sense now of foreboding around the world is palpable once more, that yet again inexperienced and egotistical Western leaders have led us to the brink once again. The people, better than the politicians, can recognise that diplomatic relationships have been changed for the worse, and is leading to the re-alignment of international friendships to the exclusion of the West.
In my conversations a few years ago with Chinese diplomats over the Sudan, they said they had been hurt by criticism over Darfur. They stated that they recognised they lacked diplomatic maturity, and were effectively new-comers to the world of diplomacy; after years of insularity and isolation. But they desired to learn and would take a backseat whilst observing and studying. And learn they have, in record time: Russia and China are now the more mature and trustworthy diplomatic forces in the world, and the voices of restraint, and hence are gaining the upper hand in international affairs.
By the ineptitude of its leaders, The West has sidelined itself, let's hope they do not get more belligerent over its reduced role in the World.
With Iraq, and increasingly Afghanistan too, now controlled by Iran, the international community should ponder this thought before celebrating too much the changes in Libya; Ghadafi may still be required yet to keep the peace between the tribal factions in Libya ..... Without him, the West may rue the day that their jets bombed his compound and S.A.S. Forces were sent to hunt him down.