Sarkozy, Gaddafi, and the Fall of Libya

by Nicholas Reed

Nicholas Reed argues that Sarkozy’s five-year sentence lays bare the Libyan cash-for-access in 2007, France’s 2011 rush to smash Gaddafi’s Pan-African project, and a neo-colonial calculus that destroyed Libya.

The criminal case of former French President Sarkozy touches the historical tensions between Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya and Western powers, particularly France. In a recent development, a Paris court sentenced Sarkozy to five years in prison for criminal conspiracy, marking a historic conviction for a former French president.

The charges? Allegations that the Libyan government funneled millions of euros (estimates range from €5 million to €50 million) to Sarkozy’s 2007 presidential campaign to facilitate Libya’s Western rapprochement. France’s later leading role in Libya’s destruction was motivated by both geopolitical fears of an empowered Africa and Sarkozy’s need to conceal personal corruption. At his trial on September 25, 2025, Sarkozy told reporters that he was innocent. “I will not apologize for something I didn’t do.” The prison sentence is enforceable immediately, with the judge saying Sarkozy would have just a short period to put his affairs in order before prosecutors call on him to head to jail. French media said Sarkozy would be summoned on October 13 to be told when he would be jailed. Ironically, seven days before the anniversary of Gaddafi’s death on October 20^, 2011, when French fighter jets and on-the-ground agents were directly complicit in the murder of a foreign head of state.

The North African country of Libya was once a continental leader. Driving the continent to form the African Union in September 1999. This was known as the Sirte Declaration. Delegations from across the continent flocked to the coastal city to begin building a new African future. In the north, France watched begrudgingly. Since 1969, Libya had been a thorn in the side of the European colonial powers. Libya supported liberation movements on the African continent, as well as abroad. The ousting of the revolutionary government of Muammar Al-Gaddafi was a decades-long fantasy of the Western powers. Brother Leader Muammar Gaddafi, time and time again, had rubbed salt in the wounds of the colonialist West, whether it was supporting such groups as the Irish Republican Army or opposing apartheid in both Gaza and South Africa. Nelson Mandela praised Libya as a Pan-African continental leader, elaborating that their support was pivotal in the success of the South African anti-Apartheid movement. Many African countries looked to Libya as not only a leader, but a stabilizing force as well. Including those in so-called Francophone Africa.

When Libya experienced its Al-Fateh Revolution in 1969, well known as Gaddafi’s Bloodless Coup, Libya was in fact among the poorest countries in the entire world. In a short time, Gaddafi’s revolutionary government transformed the country into an oasis, thanks in part to large domestic oil reserves as well as the sober policies of Muammar Gaddafi. Libya was in fact the first country in the world to gain a majority stake in its own domestic production, something which made the colonial powers nervous. Throughout the twentieth century, Libya’s revolutionary ambitions were largely shielded, thanks to diverse international friendships, such as with the USSR, Mao’s China, and various countries throughout the developing world. However, after the collapse of the USSR, many countries needed to adjust to the new era of unipolarity.

Gaddafi’s Jamahiriya, or State of the Masses, was no exception. After decades of sanctions, Libya was desperate to join the new “International Community.” Libya gave up its weapons of mass destruction program in 2003, as well as caving to intense pressure to settle the infamous Lockerbie Affair. In addition, Gaddafi agreed to begin transitioning Libya’s state-planned economy to a market-oriented one. However, it became quickly apparent to all that these changes were merely cosmetic and that Colonel Gaddafi had not forgotten his anti-colonial attitudes. His tactics merely changed. Instead of funding liberation movements, Gaddafi provided much-needed continental investment, such as funding the first African Satellite in 2008, which saved the continent a combined total of 500 million USD per year, an amount which had in the past gone into the pockets of European telecommunication companies.

Gaddafi wished to build up the strength of Africa, using the newly founded African Union (AU) as a vehicle for integration projects. These liberation projects were looked on by Europe as a positive development. That was until the AU began succeeding in its endeavors. The most well-known of these was, of course, the planned unified continental currency, the gold-based African dinar, a project which France was looking at closely, fearing that their neo-colonial territories in West Africa would abandon France. This was revealed by WikiLeaks in the famous Clinton email dump. Then French President Nicolas Sarkozy expressed his enthusiasm for the destruction of Libya, arguing that Gaddafi’s plans for the African Union were a direct threat to French interests, as well as American ones. Specifically, France feared Libya would supplant France as the dominant power in North Africa, already providing funding for infrastructure, mitigation in armed conflicts, and fruitful bilateral ties. The question remains: Why did the Libyan government fund the 2007 presidential run of Nicolas Sarkozy?

The topic of election interference remains contentious from every side of the fence. However, in the case of Sarkozy, the allegations do indeed seem to carry weight. For almost two decades, Sarkozy has been battling allegations and court cases dealing with this very issue. The case of September 2025 is the latest in these, where he has officially been jailed for five years. Sarkozy is charged with accepting millions of euros from the Libyan government — an unspecified amount, starting as low as 5 million euros to as high as 50 million euros. The charge suggests that the funding was meant to incentivize France to assist Libya in its rapprochement with the West. However, according to the son of Muammar Gaddafi, the reasons go much deeper.

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi has been very consistent in his disappointment with Nicolas Sarkozy. At the start of the 2011 NATO bombardment of Libya, Saif Gaddafi interviewed with Euronews. In this interview, Saif Gaddafi cheekily said that this clown needs to give the Libyan people back their money. Saif Gaddafi claimed that he himself oversaw some of the suitcases which were given to French officials. In addition, in the case of the trial, Saif Gaddafi was ready to provide recorded evidence and provide witnesses as well. Later in 2018, Saif Gaddafi wrote a sworn testimony to the investigating forces in France. In a 2025 exclusive interview with RIF, Saif Gaddafi corroborated the facts once more. He said that Sarkozy had been trying to exert pressure on him regarding this evidence. The first attempt allegedly came in 2021 through the Paris-based consultant Souha al-Bedri, who asked him to deny all claims of Libyan support for Sarkozy’s campaign in exchange for help resolving his case with the International Criminal Court (ICC), where he remains wanted. The back-door deal involving the Libyan and French governments remains mysterious. However, based on the actions of both parties, we can see that this arrangement was another sign of rapprochement with the West. Was this naivety? Or desperate pragmatism?

Moussa Ibrahim is the former spokesperson for the Libyan government and has spoken to Russia Today (RT) a dozen times on issues concerning Libya. In an interview with Going Underground in 2019, Moussa claimed that the Gaddafi government wished to keep the fighting front with the West quiet, so that they could pay attention to the African context. Was the Libyan financing of Sarkozy one of these enigmatic chess moves? An attempt at pacification? Indeed, after Sarkozy’s election, he relaxed several court cases which were investigating Libyan officials for being a supposed state sponsor of terror. In addition, sanctions were lifted and new bilateral ties opened. With this pacification, Gaddafi had the breathing space to build up his liberation projects. In his interview with Going Underground, Ibrahim drearily remarked,

We did not have enough time to build up our strength. If the 2011 conspiracy had been delayed…perhaps for five years…we would have been much stronger. We would have had strong alliances, a robust economy and our African brothers behind us. But the West understood we had our weaknesses. This is why they rushed in then [2011].

Gaddafi had tamed the French rooster for a time, but the leash was too thin. France’s reputation in Africa remains abhorrent to this day. Sarkozy has at last been found guilty this year, but not for his true crime. The true crime which Sarkozy has not been charged with is the destruction of Libya. France was the first country to send fighter jets to the North African country. Was it to cover up Sarkozy’s personal corruption? Indeed, Sarkozy was personally invested in this war on Libya. However, the geopolitical interests of France were at the forefront. Everyone knew that Libya’s growing strength in Africa was a flame that could spread quickly. Sarkozy may not pay for his crimes in prison, but he will be remembered as a bloody, insignificant footnote.

Libya will not forget.

NicholasReedWriter — Writers are the engineers of the human soul.