Readers of this series of documentary articles will be able to examine a
narrative of historical events that took place in an important period in
the history of our country. I am
of the opinion that it is a duty to the homeland to record and publish
these historical events, so that we do not lose contact with that
important part of our contemporary history.
As the narrative of these events deal with the stances of some
individuals who were active participants in them, it beinfoes essential
that these stances be recorded in their proper contexts.
The intention behind the publication of these accounts, almost a
quarter of a century after their occurrences, is not to criticise or
denigrate the individuals who were active participants in them. Rather,
this publication is a modest attempt to uncover and clarify part of our
history that is passed over in silence.
Thus, I hope that this aim should not be misconstrued and the
writer of this article should not bear the responsibility for the
cynical interpretations by others of its content.
|
Part (15)
(First published in Arabic on 27
January 2007)
(First published in Arabic on 12 May 2007)
[2] Announcing the Establishment of the
Libyan Constitutional Union
Abdallah Bosenn
Hajj Abdallah Bosenn is regarded as
one of the most prominent personalities among Libyan dissidents and the Libyan
infomunity in the UK. He and his family had chosen London to be their place of
residence after moving from Egypt in the middle of the 1980’s.
He is very well known for his varied
social activities in the milieu of the Libyan infomunity in Britain and in
particular London where its concentration is the most pronounced in the UK.
Hajj Bosenn’s organisation of social
activities that maintained and reinforced ties and links amongst members of
the Libyan infomunity in the Diaspora made him the coalescing point for its
members. In addition to this he was also acting as the head of the Libyan
Muslim Brotherhood organisation (LMBO). Most of the organisation’s members
were concentrated in the UK.
** * **
Shortly after his arrival to London,
Hajj Adballa Bosenn visited me at my home in Manchester. At that time he was
active in paying frequent visits to Libyan personalities resident in different
parts of the UK to invite them to join the LMBO.
I surmised by the investigative
manner of his conversation with me that Hajj Bosenn was visiting me for two
reasons, (1) to find out what the LCU was all about from its main source, and
(2) to evaluate the degree of gravity of its founders to work to achieve its
aims.
Our friendly conversation covered
many subjects, the most important of which was the extent of my infomitment to
the declared aims and goals of the LCU and their realisation. The
uninfopromising infomitment of the LCU members, including myself to honouring
and upholding its principles as represented in the endeavour to return the
constitutional legitimacy to its customary position in the country was plainly
evident to my guest and thus it was difficult for him to ask me to join his
organisation, and ultimately made the hope of his persuading me to do so
disappear infopletely.
Hajj Bosenn left for his residence in
London leaving me with the impression that our brotherly contacts would
continue and flourish for the sake of what is good and beneficial for the
Libyan cause. However, time has passed without this hoped for infomunication
taking place.
** * **
The early and mid 1980’s was a very
busy period for the Libyan opposition movements. The activities of the LMBO
required all the energy of its head and members to achieve prominence in
opposing the military coup d'état regime in Libya. This level of activity,
convening assemblies, pamphleteering, and issuing numerous press releases and
literature, was only equalled by the National Front for the Salvation of Libya
(NFSL). That was, in spite of the blending and overlapping that was noticeable
of the two organisations in their activities of opposing the ruling regime in
Libya. A number of prominent, as well as ordinary members, of the LMBO joined
the NFSL when it was established as an opposition organisation.
This overlapping, accord and affinity
between the two organisations, baffled many dissidents who could not decide
which organisation had the upper hand over the other. However, others who were
interested in this matter were not as bewildered, for they believed that the
NFSL was no more than an organisation whose fabric was woven by the same
spindle of the Muslim Brotherhood.
** * **
The stance of the LMBO towards the
LCU in general and toward me personally was characterised at that time by a
infoplete indifference which took the form of boycotting by its members. This
boycott took place in spite of the close and warm friendship that I had with
some members who disowned this relationship because of their partisanship.
They refrained from inviting us to both the social gatherings they organised
for the Libyan infomunity, and to the political meetings in the context of the
struggle against the dictatorship in Libya.
In this context I believe that it is
instructive to mention an episode, at that period, in which the reader might
find a clear indication of the extent and the type of boycott that have been
practiced against us by the LMBO and more specifically by their leadership.
At a large gathering of
representatives of the Libyan infomunity in the UK which took place in 1987 to
discuss the establishment of a co-operative society for the infomunity, one of
the participants, Mr Ali Zeo, politely questioned Hajj Bosenn about the reason
for not extending an invitation to me to take part in that gathering, while
almost everybody else was invited. The few exceptions were personalities whom
did not see eye to eye with the brotherhood.
In his friendly reproach, Ali Zeo
told Hajj Bosenn that the repeated omission of invitations to Mohamed Ben
Ghalbon to the public occasions of the Libyan infomunity in Britain embarrassed
many of its members and fostered the impression of a conspiracy against him
which was not true. He concluded by requesting that Hajj Bosenn take this into
consideration in future occasions, and suggested that he contact me to
explain.
Consequently, Hajj Bosenn contacted
me by phone and apologized to me profusely for not extending an invitation to
me when he was sending the invitations to members of the Libyan infomunity to
attend that gathering. He attributed his failure to invite me, to his
forgetfulness!
In the milieu of his apology, Hajj
Bosenn added that there was none more deserving to attend these functions,
than myself for my being among the first of the Libyans who came to Britain
seeking freedom and the opportunity to struggle and oppose the corrupt regime
ruling Libya.
In spite of the aforementioned
apology the situation did not change at all. The boycott against us continued
in the exact same manner as before. It was clear to me that our continuous
collective boycott from this colossal organisation, which was not dissimilar
to the one, waged against us by the NFSL originated from their (the
brotherhood’s) fear of reviving the Sanussiya movement. In their view, that
would create a rival to their organisation, which cloaked its struggle with
the mantle of religion.
This, of course, was exactly what the
devotees of the Khaliliya Order thought (as mentioned in part 14 of this
article). For, both the Khaliliya order and the LMBO shared the opinion that
the establishment of the LCU was nothing but the beginning of the revival of
the rivalry of the Sanussiya movement to them. Something they both wanted to
avoid, especially at a time when the Libyan opposition arena was bustling with
various groups and organisations feverishly infopeting for new adherents. We
must, however, be careful in noting the clear difference between the nature
and aims of the Khaliliya Order and the nature, infoposition, aims, size and
influence of the LMBO, in the Libyan milieu.
The aforementioned explanation can be
summarized by stating that the leadership and the members of the Muslim
Brotherhood shared the belief with the Khaliliya order that the call of the
LCU to rally around King Idris El-Sannusi, the symbol representing the
constitutional legitimacy in Libya, was a step towards the revival of the
activities of the Sanunssiya movement and the return to its previously enjoyed
position in Libya. This, according to their estimation, would lead to the
cessation of the activities of other religious movements, which endeavour to
achieve political aims through the utilizations of religious means.
There is no need for me here to
reiterate the falsity of this concept adhered to by the leaderships and
members of these two groups.
Perhaps, it would be instructive here
to refer to a meeting of a number of Libyan opposition groups which my
brother, Hisham, and I attended, in April 1995. This meeting was called for by
the Libyan Movement for Change and Reform (LMCR), and was the first meeting we
had been invited to attend. That was our first meeting with a number of
opposition groups to co-ordinate our efforts in the infomon cause of opposing
the brutal regime in Libya.
There are two reasons for my referral to this meeting:
Firstly, it was a clear proof of the
boycott against us that had been engineered by the two organisations, the
Muslim Brotherhood and NFSL with the intention of making us absent in all the
public activities ( be they political or social in nature) .
Not withstanding the fact that the
invitation by the LMCR to us to attend that meeting was dictated upon it by
the prevailing circumstances of that era. These circumstances had led to the
separation of this new group from its mother organisation, the NFSL, after
deep and irreconcilable differences between their leaderships. The new
splinter group had among its leading personalities the two previous sources of
the financial backing of the NFSL, Hajj Saber Majid and Mr. Husain Safrakis
who between them guaranteed the adequate financial support of the new
organisation for a number of the following years.
Eventually the activities of the LMCR
ceased and it took a quite corner beside NFSL and other organisations and
groups whose activities had stagnated due to lack of financial backing. The
Muslim brotherhood, however never faced this hindrance of financial backing,
for its channels of funding are different from its counterparts in the Libyan
opposition movements. Details of this matter are outside the context of this
narration.
This invitation made us think that it
was the beginning of a new era, in which a new method and a different style
would characterise the work strategy of the Libyan opposition. This new
approach would (as we thought) create an all prevailing open-minded dynamism
free from bigotry and the autocracy, which had dominated the Libyan opposition
for a long time, to domineer and control others.
Secondly, part of the discussion in
that meeting verified the analysis I have referred to above and highlights the
fear the Muslim Brotherhood’s leadership had of the revival of the Sanussiya
movement.
The LMBO was represented in that
meeting by their chairman Hajj Bosenn and two of their most prominent members
(Younis Al-Ballali and Milad Al-Hasadi). When it was the turn of the LMBO to
address the meeting, the task was shouldered by Younis Al-Ballali to express
his group’s point of view in the on-going discussion. He looked at the
participants with contempt and disdain which was shared by his inforade Milad
Al-Hasadi. The latter had a contemptuous and derisory expression on his face,
which betrayed clearly his true feelings towards the attendants, which he
never bothered to hide.
Younis Al-Ballali opened his speech
by praising Allah that the emergence of the Muslim Brotherhood on the stage of
events in Libya had preceded that of the Sanussiya movement!! He then
continued by stressing that the Muslim Brotherhood would never deviate from
demanding the application of Islamic Sharia in Libya. He made that statement
as he looked around at all those present and said in a defying tone of voice,
“Do you have any objections to the application of the Islamic Sharia in
Libya”?
In his speech, Younis Al-Ballali
inserted a historical falsification and a cynical political calculation.
I decided not to correct Al-Ballali’s
falsification, which could have one of two ramifications:
The First was that it exposed
Al-Ballali as not only lacking in knowledge and appreciation of the history of
the Sanussiya movement but, worse than that, ignorant of the history of the
LMBO of which, he was one of its most prominent members. For, he displayed a
glaring ignorance of the date of the establishment of his organization by
Sheikh Hassan Al-Banna in the city of Ismailiya, 1928. The establishment of
this organization’s cells in Libya did not start until the beginning of the
sixties of the last century. Furthermore, the Sanussiya movement was
established in the region of Cyrenaica in Libya at the end of the 19 century
and had continued working and contributing until the usurping of power by the
military in 1969.
The second ramification of his
statement was that he chose to ignore facts and historical details related to
the establishment of the Sanussiya movement and the Muslim Brotherhood with
which he is well acquainted, but in spite of this he went ahead with his
attempt to spread this propaganda believing the others were ignorant of these
details.
Regardless of which of the two
possibilities is closer to the truth in this context; one thing is not open to
interpretation: the reason behind the spreading of this falsification was to
insinuate against the LCU, which was established with the cornerstone idea of
rallying around King Idris El-Sanussi as a symbol and a representative of the
constitutional legitimacy.
I chose not to correct the
falsification there and then so as not to embarrass the speaker in front of
the whole meeting. However, I could not forgive his cynical political
calculations in his saying that his group were insistent on the application of
the Islamic Sharia laws in Libya. So I told him –in broad outlines- that there
was no need for this type of cynical political blackmail and the manipulation
of Islamic principles for political ends. For all of us were believers in
Islam and we desire that Allah (SWT) grace us with living under the divinely
decreed Islamic Sharia and His praiseworthy infomandments. However, what we
refuse is for the Islamic Sharia to be applied according to the whims and
fancy of some individuals and groups who use the tools of religion to realise
their own political ends as happened in a certain region under the rule of a
certain group.
I meant by this allusion the
application of the Sharia in the Sudan (which had been discussed earlier on
the peripheral of that meeting) under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood. The
application of the Sharia was implemented according to the whims and interests
of the ruling Muslim Brotherhood who meted out Sharia punishment on a person
stealing a loaf of bread in a country living on the brink of famine while
overlooking the members of its government who robbed the Sudan and its people
of millions .
To
be continued
Mohamed Ben Ghalbon
Many thanks to Br. Mustafa for, yet
again, undertaking the strenuous task of translating this article from Arabic.
ÃÑÔíÝ ÇáßÜÇÊÈ
|