An Interview with Gaddafi

• Tweet

"We are against the manufacture and acquisition of nuclear weapons"

Q. Would you respond to the Reagan Administration's charge that Libya backs international terrorism in general, and, more specifically, that it backs terrorist Palestinian groups, the Irish Republican Army, the Red Brigades, the Red Army Faction, the ETA [Basque separatists] and others?

A. First, the American Government is not entitled to talk about terrorism, since it practices the highest degree of terrorism in the world. Furthermore, the American Government is not a policeman. It ought to correct its own behavior before it talks about the behavior of others. Secondly, there is a big difference between supporting liberation movements, the just cause of people fighting for freedom, and supporting terrorism. We have emphasized many times that we are opposed to real terrorism. But there is no justification for putting the P.L.O. on the list of terrorist organizations. The cause of the Irish people is also not terrorist. We give [the I.R.A.] moral, but not material, support. The other organizations you mentioned are terrorist, and we have no connection whatsoever with them.

Q. How do you understand terrorism?

A. We put the production of nuclear weapons at the top of the list of terrorist activities. As long as the big powers continue to manufacture atomic weapons, it means they are continuing to terrorize the world; also the deployment of military bases on other countries' territories; also deploying naval fleets around the world. This is one reason why the U.S. is a top terrorist force in the world.

Q. The Soviet Union does all those things. Is it terrorist?

A. The manufacture of atomic weapons by anyone is terroristic. But the Soviet Union has no military bases on others' territories.

Q. But doesn't the presence of 85,000 Soviet troops in Afghanistan—a formerly independent nonaligned Islamic country—sharply contradict what you are saying? Not to mention garrisoning of Soviet troops in the socialist countries of Eastern Europe and the establishment of a large Soviet naval base in Viet Nam?

A. I am not here to be an advocate for the Soviet Union. Of course it is a superpower.

Q. Under what circumstances would you carry out your past threat to join the Warsaw Pact?

A. It would be a necessity when America constitutes a real threat against Libya. If Egypt, the Sudan and other neighboring countries were to put themselves in the service of the Atlantic Alliance, for example, then the necessity [of Libya's joining the Warsaw Pact] might arise.

Q. Would Egypt's acceptance of American troops stationed on its territory meet that condition in your view?

A. If Egypt was in the service of the Atlantic Alliance, in any form, we would have to reconsider our position as a whole. We would face a serious situation.

Q. There is considerable anxiety that Libya it self may acquire a nuclear weapon, whether on its own or through cooperation with Pakistan in the development of an "Islamic bomb." Yet you describe the acquisition of such weapons as the ultimate in international terrorism.