|
بسم
الله الرحمن الرحيم
Part (16)
(First published in Arabic on 8 July 2007)
[2]
Announcing the Establishment of the Libyan Constitutional
Union
Nuri
Ramadhan Alkikhia
There are individuals with personal
characteristics that are attractive and influential to members
of their social milieu. On the other hand there are others
with personal characteristics that are repellent and
unattractive in the eyes of the others. Between these two
poles,
lie the majority of people with regular personal
characteristics.
Extremely attractive characteristics lead to a
charisma which allows those possessing it to play the role of
leader to their social or political milieu, who would follow
them without hesitation.
**
*
**
I felt it necessary to firstly elaborate on
this point before going any further in talking about
Nuri Alkikhia,
the subject of this particular chapter of my documentary
article.
For without
clarification and explanation of the level of magnetism of
this personality, and his influence in his social milieu, it
would not be possible to present a full picture of the events
he shaped with his hostile attitude towards the establishment
of the LCU.
Nuri Alkikhia has a charming personality and a
noted glittering intellectual presence among the Libyan groups
abroad, along with conversational skills, intellectual ability
and eloquence which enable him to captivate his audience. In
addition to all the above, his personality is unmistakably
characterised by his patriotic sincerity and his true and
profound love for the homeland. There can hardly be a
gathering of the Libyan dissidents in exile without Nuri
Alkikhia being present in it.
These qualities should not be overlooked, when
assessing the size of damage he
caused to the reputation and activities of the LCU at its
inception. This was as a result of his raw enmity towards the
LCU, and his intention to sabotage and hinder its efforts to
realize its planned patriotic goals.
It is to be noted that in spite of the fact
that there was no personal relationship between Nuri Alkikhia
and myself, there has been a strong and established friendly
relationship between our two families dating over one hundred
years. Also, despite the differences in political opinion
between Nuri Alkikhia and I, which resulted from the
establishment of the LCU, our personal relationship has not
been affected as was the case of many others who could not
differentiate between political tendencies and social
relationships.
**
*
**
Before I continue narrating the events that
shaped Nuri Alkikhia’s attitude towards the establishment of
the LCU, I have to draw the reader’s attention to two
important points:
Firstly; there were two motives behind Nuri
Alkikhia hostile position vis-à-vis the LCU. One of
these motives was personal and concerned his own experience
which led him to coming to the wrong conclusion. This will be
clarified in more detail later.
The second motive was partisan and concerned
the fact that he is one of the leaders of the “Libyan National
Democratic Grouping”.
The latter will be discussed in full details
later in a chapter that deals with the positions of the
dissident Libyan groups and organisations.
The second point concerns an article written by
Nuri Alkikhia which appeared in one of the Libyan sites on
June 21st 2007 under the title “ If It Could Only Have Been
Made By Wishes, We Would Have Modelled it on the Swedish
style”
[1].
In this article, which addressed many other issues, he
expressed his opinion and evaluation vis-à-vis the
feverish competition in the arena of the national struggle
undergone by the different Libyan dissident organisations from
the time of their formation to the time of their decline, or
freezing of their activities. What is of note in this regard
is the forthright acknowledgement of Nuri Alkikhia regarding
the correctness of the LCU main line of thinking and approach,
and his exhortation of others to follow suit and
acknowledging, like him, this clear and apparent truth
concerning the LCU.
[2]
Nuri Alkikhia’s article- referred to above-
indicated an honourable stance made more prominent by the
known and typical courage of its writer. However much we
greatly appreciate and respect this clear and unequivocal
stance, we can not allow courtesy to prevent us from revealing
the truth and the immutable facts we promised the reader at
the start of this narrative.
It was by pure coincidence that the chapter of
the article dealing with Nuri Alkikhia was being made ready to
be published when at the same time his above mentioned article
appeared on the internet. As Nuri Alkikhia’s previous stance
vis-à-vis the LCU had been characterised by a glaring
hostility, his extensive influence on Libyans in the dissident
milieus, highlighted above, caused a great deal of harm to the
LCU during the early period of its inception; through the
spreading of fallacies and destructive opinions. In fact the
damage caused by Nuri Alkikhia to the LCU during the time of
its foundation and to its efforts to rally the Libyans abroad
around its main idea was no less than that caused by Haj
Mohammad Assaifat and Mr. Mustafa Ben-Halim. This trio
succeeded in damaging the reputation of the LCU among the
Libyan dissidents through their hostile campaign against its
direction and approach. By so doing they caused the LCU to
miss its justly deserved chance to present its idea in a
proper atmosphere free from misrepresentations and false
information.
[3]
Therefore it was only natural to go ahead with
publication of this chapter containing all the facts
concerning the stance of Nuri Alkikhia vis-à-vis the
establishment of the LCU in a direct and frank manner and
without any favouritism resulting from his recent gallant
acknowledgement in favour of the LCU.
This affirms the veracity of our assertion that
the main goal of our publishing this documentary article is to
record facts and events in our history that are not discussed.
The intention is not to denigrate the personalities that are
concerned. This is emphasised in the introduction above, which
is repeatedly published in all chapters of this article,
directly under the title of every chapter.
Perhaps it is necessary to be reminded of the
preface to the first part of this article in which it has been
stated that the motive behind the writing of this article is
the attempt to answer the question posed by Mr Faraj Alfakhry
in part two of his article, “The Missed Opportunities”
published on “Libya Our Home” on 23rd December 2005
[4].
**
*
**
Liberation ideologies dominated Nuri Alkikhia’s
convictions during the time of the establishment of the LCU.
One of the most prominent of these convictions held by him and
most of the intelligentsia in the post independence era was
the idea of the unsuitability of the Monarchy as the form of
government in Libya, and his belief in the necessity for the
Total Liberation Revolution. A concept that was widely
spreading with the
emergence
of the currents of nationalism among intellectuals in the
eastern part of the Arab World. The effect of this was
reflected in a series of military coups d’etat that
acted to disguise the real intentions of their perpetrators,
low ranking officers of the armed forces, to gain power and
authority. These intentions were camouflaged by the use of the
concept of revolution and its glittering slogans calling for
freedom, unity and equality.
Therefore, it would not have been a surprise if
Nuri Alkikhia attacked the idea, approach and aims of the LCU
when it was announced. However, what was strange and
reprehensible was his attempt to undermine the credibility and
the basis of the LCU’s establishment by raising doubts
concerning the consent of the King in this regard among the
Libyan milieus in exile at every opportunity he could. This
had an effect on the opinions of many Libyans of influence and
power concerning the intentions of the LCU which led to the
loss to the LCU of their help when it had been newly
established.
Nuri Alkikhia could have formed his sceptical
ideas in this matter from his comparison between the King’s
consent for me to establish the LCU, and his own personal
experience of being refused by the King to interview him for
the magazine published by his opposition group.
The King refused Nuri Alkikhia’s request to
have an interview with him during his visit to His Majesty at
his residence in Cairo (sometime in the late seventies or
early eighties).
Nuri Alkikhia had accompanied his mother, the
honourable Hajja Halima Alkikhia, daughter of the prominent
Libyan personality, Omar Pasha Mansur
Alkikhia.
She was among very few who had the courtesy to maintain
regular visits to the Royal household, and express love and
affection to the King and Queen during their cold exile. That
audience with the King and Queen was granted as a purely
social occasion where the Alkikhia family would come to pay
their respects and be blessed by the holy man.
**
*
**
As the royal family discharged their
hospitality duties towards their visitors
Nuri Alkikhia did not bind himself to the preconditions of
that visit. He asked the King for an interview for the
magazine “Sawt Libya”, the official publication of the
organisation, “The National Libyan Democratic Movement”
[5],
then rumoured to be financed by Omar
Almehishi (a member of the military coup d’etat
council). Moreover, among the editors of this publication were
Dr. AbdulRahman Asswaihly and his cousin Salah Asswaihly,
known for their pathological hate and intense hostility
towards the Sannusi movement in general and the King in
particular.
The King would not agree to the interview,
requested by his visitor, not just for the above reasons but
his main motive was the obligation associated with his status
as a political refugee. This obligation involved the
compliance with many rules and regulations. Further, the King
was under the watchful eyes of the host country which had
imposed several conditions stipulating that he would not be
involved in any political activities or press interviews for
whatever source regardless of its type or the reason behind
it.
The King, known for his diplomacy as attested
to by historical events recorded and documented in books and
references dealing with his biography, apologised in a
courteous manner that would not hurt
Nuri Alkikhia’s
feeling, yet would stop him from pursuing his request, which
was void of tact, courtesy and wisdom, any further. The King’s
answer was decisive and expressive when he told his guest,
“We do not deal with politics in
exile.”
In this context, The King was totally honest,
for he had not involved himself directly in any activity that
might impinge on his political status in the eyes of the
Egyptian authorities. However, Nuri Alkikhia used the King’s
reply as a basis for his attack on the credibility of the
King’s blessing for the establishment of the LCU. He did not
stop to think sufficiently about the background to the King’s
refusal to that interview for his publication, which did not
abstain from publishing on its cover two crossed photos -one
of the crown and the other of Qaddafi, in a clear reference to
the undesirability of the two regimes (see appendix 1 below).
Further, there was an article in a different issue of this
publication in which the nature of these two regimes was
analysed, and a conclusion was reached concerning their
corruption and shortcoming making them both unsuitable to rule
Libya (see appendix 2 below).
[7]
It is understandable that Nuri Alkikhia would
maintain his doubting position concerning the credibility of
the LCU founder with respect to the King’s blessing or
otherwise of the LCU establishment.
Nuri Alkikhia’s first hand experience of the
King’s refusal of his request for an interview, and the
declaration of the King to him that he did not practice
politics in exile was the yardstick he used in his judgement
concerning my declaring the obtaining of the blessing of the
King regarding the establishment of the LCU. He had in fact
told me once that the King personally told him, “We do not
deal with politics in exile.” This was an indirect
reference to his doubts and scepticism concerning the truth of
the King’s blessing and agreement regarding the establishment
of the LCU. Hence Nuri Alkikhia justified to himself the
spreading of the aforementioned deduction from his own
particular experience and went down the slippery slope of
attacking and doubting my honesty and integrity in this
regard.
His judgement of denying the consent of the
King to the establishment of the LCU was based on the myopic
view which led to the failure to comprehend the totality of
his relevant experience, which was fundamentally different to
that related to the King’s consent concerning the
establishment of the LCU and this explains his arriving at the
wrong conclusion.
Nuri Alkikhia understood that the refusal of
the King to hold an interview with him, and his declaring to
him personally, that he did not deal with politics in exile
was a rigid and constant principle the King did not deviate
from. Therefore, Nuri Alkikhia was convinced that it was
impossible for the King to agree to the establishment of the
LCU.
From this view, Nuri Alkikhia allowed himself
to adopt a doubting position concerning the credibility of the
founder of the LCU.
It did not occur to Nuri Alkikhia that firstly,
the King did not have the freedom to practice politics in
exile, by virtue of his position as a political refugee. The
host country demanded he not get involved in politics or grant
press interviews (especially to the opposition publications).
Secondly, it did not occur to Nuri Alkikhia at
all that the statement of the King concerning his not
practicing politics in exile was not a rigid and unchanging
principle to be followed by him all his life under all
circumstances. On the contrary it was an exception imposed on
him by his status as a refugee forbidden from practicing
politics by the host country. This is evident by the fact that
he had practiced politics in the period before Independence at
the highest level when he was in exile for twenty years, from
1922 to 1942, and it is ironic that that happened in the same
host country where this conversation took place.
Thirdly, it did not strike Nuri Alkikhia that
the King did not have any other option but to say that he did
not deal in politics whilst in exile. The prevailing
circumstances then forced him to close the subject concerning
Nuri Alkikhia unreasonable request and to prevent him from
repeating it. Therefore, the King’s reply was decisive in the
manner demanded by the circumstances at that point in time.
Fourthly, Nuri Alkikhia did not comprehend that
the essential difference between my obtaining the consent and
blessing of the King for the establishment of the LCU during
my first visit to him, and the King’s refusal to grant a press
interview in Nuri Alkikhia’s visit rested in the different
nature of the two visits.
In other words, my visit to the King was – on
the one hand- not in the category of friendly and social calls
made by a Libyan citizen to greet his Monarch and to obtain
his blessing and prayers. The reasons for my visit were well
defined and its aim was solely to obtain the King’s permission
and blessing for the establishment of the LCU. Further, in my
case the King was fully informed of all the relevant details
in the time between my first contact with him and obtaining
his permission to pay him a visit. This time span amounted to
approximately a full year (see the full details concerning
this point in the first chapter of this article.)
On the other hand the reasons for Nuri
Alkikhia’s visit to the King were well defined within the
social obligations and specifically to endeavour to express
love and affection to the King and receive from him blessings
and prayers. And in accordance with the traditions and the
relevant protocols in this regard, it is not permitted for the
person who defined the nature of his visit to a personality
with the stature and the importance of King Idris to change
its programme which has been prepared in advance and to deal
with subjects outside the matter that he came for.
**
*
**
To clarify the situation in its entirety for
the benefit of the reader of this documentary article, it is
perhaps relevant in this context to provide an example showing
the manner and the means Nuri Alkikhia pursued in his attacks
on the LCU and the misinformation he was spreading concerning
it among the Libyans in their various gatherings.
The most blatant example that could be given in
this regard is what happened during the period of my father’s
death in Alexandria in the summer of 1984. Nuri Alkikhia was
among the first who came to express their condolences and
support and he was among the last to leave during every night
of the traditional period of mourning.
According to the custom and the generally kept
tradition in our Libyan society, a few weeks after the death
of the person, the number of people who offer their
condolences gradually dwindle with the passing of time and
only relatives and close friends of the family of the deceased
maintain their daily visits for a period of time whose length
depends on each individual case, as a gesture of their
sympathy and affection for the bereaved family.
Nuri Alkikhia was among those friends who
continued their visits without interruption after the first
period of the bereavement had passed. During that period our
chats usually extended until the early hours of the following
morning.
During one of the gatherings a heated
discussion concerning the constitutional question in Libya
ensued. One of the people present asked me about the nature
of the LCU because he was not fully aware of its entire
details. As soon as I started answering that question, I was
interrupted by Nuri Alkikhia with signs of anger and agitation
on his face saying words to the effect of; you are very
clever!, “أنت
مش ساهل!”.
He then went on to say; “you have manipulated this discussion
cleverly to cover the case for the Constitution so that you
could advance the case for the LCU, I will not permit you to
use this gathering as a platform for this purpose.”
This small incident speaks volumes about Nuri
Alkikhia stance vis-à-vis the LCU. Further, this
incident gave credence to what I had heard frequently about
Nuri Alkikhia’s attacks on the LCU and the misinformation
concerning its ideas and aims that he had been spreading.
Prior to this incident I had refrained from
discussing politics in general and the LCU in particular, on a
personal level, with Nuri Alkikhia. This was due to an
experience I had with him during our first meeting at the end
of 1981. I visited him in his then residence in London to
introduce and explain the details and aims of the idea of the
LCU to him. He understood and appreciated the ramifications
and the consequences related to this subject in the expected
manner of a man with his sharp intellect and refined culture.
He then told me “This is a grandeur idea which needs Omar
Pasha Alkikhia (Nuri’s grandfather).” He paused for a while
and added regretfully, “But Omar Pasha is dead!”
My reaction to his tactless reply was to utter
the customary prayer for the dead on the soul of his
grandfather and never again to talk to him about politics on a
personal level. However, this decision has not prevented us
from discussing politics on an organisational level, i.e. the
level common to all the opposition organisations and groups,
whenever the need arises.
To be continued
Mohamed Ben Ghalbon
11
September 2007
chairman@libyanconstitutionalunion.net
[1]
A link to the said article: http://www.libya-watanona.com/adab/nkikhia/nk21067a.htm
[2]
Nuri Alkikhia’s acknowledgement of the correctness of the LCU
stance and approach, in his aforementioned article, was not
new to us, since he told my brother Hisham about his “new”
conviction when they met in the National Conference of the
Libyan Opposition which convened in the summer of 2005 in
London.
[3]
That
period was exceedingly critical and difficult for the founders
of the LCU. Problems associated with that period could be
summarised in two elements:
Firstly, the misinformation campaign which
was led by Haj Mohammad Assaifat, Mustafa Ben Halim and Nuri
Alkikhia, in the period after the announcement of the
establishment of the LCU. This campaign hindered LCU
activities and caused a lot of trouble for its founders and
members when it had just been launched.
Secondly, the letting down by a group of the
founders members during the early preparation stage, that
preceded the announcement of the establishment of the LCU.
The
first of these two elements concerning the disinformation
campaign has been clarified in the parts of this article
dealing with the relevant personalities. However, with regard
to the matter concerning the letting down perpetrated by some
personalities associated with us in the preparation stage. The
summary of the relevant details is as follows:
Muftah Lamlum and his co-members of the “The Libyan Patriotic
Front” organisation were among the people who were invited to
participate in the establishment of the LCU. After looking
into the ideas of the LCU and its aims and reaching full
agreement with these principles, they dissolved their
aforementioned organisation and all of them joined the LCU as
founder members.
With this background in mind, Muftah Lamlum was assigned
essential tasks to be fulfilled after the declaration of the
establishment of the LCU. However, he got in touch with me two
days before this declaration to tell me of his decision to
withdraw from the LCU and of his absolving himself of all the
obligations that he promised to undertake. He told me, “Your
establishing of the LCU is tantamount to political suicide.”
The behaviour of Muftah Lamlum was contrary to all the rules
of commitment and responsibility, and caused us some
perturbation during that very important period. This behaviour
was in total contrast to that of, Mohammad Algeziery, another
founder of the LCU whose conduct was the ultimate in
commitment and the deep rooted sense of responsibility. It is
beyond words and description in this context to mention
Mohammad Algeziery’s ceaseless efforts and contribution, his
health and circumstances permitting during the years.
Mohammad Algeziery refused a generous offer by Dr. Mohammad
Elmegrief, when the National Front for the Salvation of Libya
(NFSL) was enjoying its highest level of influence and
prestige, to leave the LCU and join the Salvation Front in
return for an enticing monthly salary. This offer was made
when the two (Mr Algeziery and Dr Elmegrief) had a private
meeting arranged by Mr. Assenusi Albieggo.
The reader can find below a photo for Muftah Lamlum and
Mohammad Algeziery. This photo was taken during the
preparatory work for the establishment of the LCU.
[4]
Full details of this subject are in the preface of chapter one
of this article
http://www.libya-watanona.com/news/lcu/lc11066a.htm
[5]
Nuri Alkikhia was one of the most prominent leaders of the
“The National Libyan Democratic Movement”, merged in September
1981 with The National Libya Grouping” (founded by Omar
Almeheshi) to form
“Libyan National Democratic Grouping”
which still pursues its opposition activities abroad until
now.
[6]
In
spite of persistent rumours among the Libyans, at that time,
that Omar Almeheshi is the financial backer of the activities
of “The National Libyan Democratic Movement”, however, there
is no material evidence that proves or disproves these
rumours.
[7]
See appendices 1 & 2 below, and the English translation of
the relevant extracts of the movement’s “political vision”.
|
