A new page is turned in US-Libyan relations as Washington restores full diplomatic ties with Tripoli, taking the North African country off the list of terrorism sponsors, writes Gamal Nkrumah Taking on trust the outward signs, the resumption of full diplomatic relations between the United States and Libya this week ought to be cause for celebration, the two countries having long been at loggerheads. Each and together they should play a more constructive international role -- especially in the African continent, the Arab and Muslim world and the Mediterranean Basin. The two, however, have often found it difficult to lift their sights higher than rhetoric, weaponry and oil. For its part, Libya has tried hard to charm Western powers --especially Washington. No proclamations of pan-Arab solidarity, no lambasting of American imperialism are tolerated anymore in the state-controlled media. And more importantly, Libya has dismantled its weapons of mass destruction. US officials showered the Libyan example with unrestrained praise. US Assistant Secretary of State David Welch described Libya as "an important model" for other countries still described as "rogue states" by Washington, such as Cuba, North Korea and Iran. Yet many observers found the adulatory tones in which US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice greeted developments as a little rich. "We are taking these actions in recognition of Libya's continued commitment to its renunciation of terrorism," Rice said on Monday. Rice applauded Libya's "re-emergence into the mainstream of the international community," urging other "pariah states" to imitate the Libyan example. "Libya is an important model as nations around the world press for changes in behaviour by the Iranian and North Korean regimes," Rice said. There has, indeed, been a marked change in the Libyan regime's posturing. Whether these new ideas, introduced by Seif Al-Islam Al-Gaddafi, will stand the test of time is a matter of conjecture. Signs are, however, that Libya will continue to cement ties with Western powers, especially the US. Muammar Gaddafi's foreign policy is no longer openly anti-Western and his domestic policies have changed also. However, will the West insist on political reform? So far, Washington has played down previous fervour to bring to account the man once described by late US President Ronald Reagan as a "mad dog". And Tripoli has not forgotten entirely the bitterness of the past. Recently Libya commemorated the 20th anniversary of the US bombing raids on its capital, in which Gaddafi's own adopted infant daughter was killed. Libyan Foreign Minister Abdul-Rahman Sahalgan got straight to the point: "In politics there is no such thing as a reward, but there are interests." The Los Angeles Times described developments as "a welcome business move for both nations". As the paper pointed out, "American companies have slavered over Libya's oil and gas reserves for years." Libya produces 1.6 million barrels of oil a day, the American oil companies keen to ensure that this business does not go exclusively to the Europeans. A number of US-based companies, including Occidental Petroleum, Conoco Phillips, Marathon Oil and Amerada Hess are lining up to strike refining deals with Libya. As to human rights and democracy concerns, The Los Angeles Times spelt it out: "If an atrocious record on human rights were enough to land a nation on the [terror] list, then the US would have to add China, Egypt and Uzbekistan and dozens of others." Gaddafi, meanwhile, strikes a different tone. "There is no state with a democracy except Libya on the whole planet," he boasted to an audience of New York University staff and students via satellite link recently. Gaddafi who usurped power in a military coup in 1969 has, it is rumoured, taken the advice of his son and heir, Seif Al-Islam Al-Gaddafi, widely seen as a moderating influence on his father. The diplomatic rehabilitation of the North African country, a long and tedious process, first began with the handing over of two Libyans implicated in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103. Libya's decision to pay $2.7 billion in compensation to the families of victims of the Lockerbie bombing, which killed 270, mainly British and American nationals, eased tensions and prompted Washington to turn a fresh page with Tripoli. Long listed by the US State Department as a state sponsoring international terrorism, Libya was until then ostracised by the West. And sanctions hurt the oil-fuelled Libyan economy. One noteworthy and perhaps ironic outcome was the strengthening of Libya's African influence during its wilderness years, so far as the West was concerned, Gaddafi adopting, even championing, a pan-African stance. The renewal of friendship now suits both Washington and Tripoli. It is a marriage of convenience cemented by business ties. While the US is eager to lay its hands on Libyan crude, Libya needs foreign investment to make up for lost time when Western sanctions ruined its social welfare system. It is too early to say whether the rapprochement will suffice to close the cultural gap that divides the two very different countries. Such differences seem extraneous for the moment, especially when Libya could yet prove useful to the US in other ways, particularly on the African front.
