Commitment

French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron turned up in Tripoli this week. They came to reassure the Libyan people of European support as they rebuild a country devastated by civil war.

They were welcomed warmly by leaders of the transition council and by ordinary Libyans in the streets. Britain and France carried much of the weight of the UN-mandated NATO air cover that was crucial in breaking down Gadhafi’s military machine. Without that air support, this unlikely revolution would not have happened. The ragtag rebel units would have been crushed and all dissent put under the boot.

Fighting is still going on. There are still a handful of pro-Gadhafi strongholds where remnants of the deposed tyrant’s supporters are still resisting. The latest reports indicate rebel units have entered Gadhafi’s hometown of Sirte although fighting is still intense in the two southern Libyan cities of Bani Walid and Sabha.

The wily Gadhafi did not do the expected. He did not retreat to his hometown on the coast. By all indications, he and his sons fled Tripoli to the south, very likely to Bani Walid and then on to Sabha. Both cities are deep in the Sahara desert and vulnerable to a siege. One of Gadhafi’s sons, Saadi crossed over to Niger and sought asylum. Other family members moved west and crossed into Algeria.

By every measure, however, the Gadhafi regime is finished. The task of reconstruction begins even as the hunt for the deposed tyrant is still in progress. This is the most important undertaking, shaping the oil-rich nation’s future.

Although Libya is a large, sprawling country, it has a population of only about six million — about half the daytime population of Metropolitan Manila. This is why Libya relies heavily on millions of migrant workers from Egypt, the sub-Saharan African countries and, yes, the Philippines to man the oil facilities, schools and hospitals. Even Gadhafi relied on a mercenary security force manned by fighters from Chad and Niger.

Small as Libya’s population might be, tribal identities are well defined. There are over 120 distinct tribal groups composing Libya’s population. Tribal and clan leaders have an important voice in the way the country is run. The immediate concern of the transition leadership is to diminish the importance of tribal lines of division and undertake nation-building as a common project of all Libyans.

The European leaders are anxious to see the Libyan revolution produce a modern secular state, preferably one shaped by democratic politics. They do not want to see a triumphant popular revolution eventually consumed by tribal infighting or hijacked by fanatical movements.

The specter of the hijacked Iranian revolution hangs heavily in the minds of the European leaders. A successful popular revolution in 1979 saw the rise to power of radical clerics and the consolidation of a repressive, anti-Western regime. A parallel outcome in Libya, although unlikely, will be a horror not only for the Libyan people but also for the Europeans.

An outcome similar to Iran is unlikely because the Gadhafi regime, for all its repressiveness and spectacular excesses, consciously cultivated a secular society after the Turkish model. It downplayed tribal identities and tried hard to build Libyan nationalism. It built a good educational system and sent the brightest of the Libyan youth to European universities for higher education.

Islamist movements, that took some root in Algeria and deep roots in Egypt as part of the resistance to tyrannical regimes, barely exist in Libya. The leaders of the transition council are highly-educated and cosmopolitan individuals who are not disposed to medieval demagoguery. The rebel units are led by young, well-trained professionals, some of them children of exiled Libyan intellectuals persecuted by Gadhafi who returned from comfortable lives abroad to fight in the desert.

Most important, the basic Libyan population is extremely grateful to Europe for helping them overthrow a tyrant. This is not a revolution animated by some anti-western ideology. It is a revolution animated by a popular desire for a life of freedom and dignity.

Nevertheless, the European leaders want to be as helpful as they can be to close any possibility that the post-revolution reconstruction is intercepted by a new demagogue exploiting pompous public expectations in the midst of great challenges.

Last month, Britain released to the transition council billions in freshly printed Libyan currency impounded when sanctions were imposed on Gadhafi. The money was direly needed to pay civil servants and deliver services to a battered population. Billions more in frozen Libyan assets are due to be released over the next few weeks.

In addition, Britain and France offered the transition council millions more in technical assistance, ranging from special mine-clearing teams to medical equipment, to help in the rebuilding of the Libyan state. They are making sure the bonds of friendship between Europe and the new Libya will be as reliable as possible.

The eventual outcome in Libya is important to the political careers of the two European leaders as well. Cameron, and especially Sarkozy, stuck their necks out for the Libyan revolutionaries. When Benghazi was the only city under rebel control, Sarkozy’s government went boldly ahead and extended diplomatic recognition to the transition council. French warplanes saved Benghazi from an onslaught by Gadhafi’s tanks.

The success of democratic consolidation in Libya is important not only for the Libyans. There is another important constituency closely observing events in Libya: the Syrian people, now demonstrating the same valor and courage in their own fight against the Assad dictatorship.

The Europeans want to show the Syrian people what is possible if they do not yield to horrific repression and persist in their struggle for dignity and freedom.