【新唐人2011年4月4日讯】前中共驻利比亚大使王厚立撰写的一篇：为利比亚独裁者卡扎菲唱赞歌的文章，近来在网上引来炮轰，网友质问：既然卡扎菲如此好，那为什么要用血腥的手段去镇压民众呢？为什么杀人魔王都是中共的好朋友呢？香港媒体则撰文，深入分析了中共对卡扎菲的立场和矛盾心理。
这篇原来刊载在大陆官方媒体《世界新闻报》的文章，是由1989年出任中共驻利比亚大使的王厚立撰写的，文中回忆了他作为大使多次被卡扎菲单独接见、获得特殊“礼遇”的往事。王厚立将文章命名为《真实的卡扎菲》，但因为文章刻意为卡扎菲涂脂抹粉，在网络上曝光后，立即受到网民的声讨。
《网易》网友指出，这位大使是选择性失明，对卡扎菲的恶行视而不见，一味的为他开脱罪行。
网友质问，“真是令人百思不得其解，为什么那些独裁者和杀人魔王都是你（中共）的好朋友呢？是惺惺相惜，还是臭味相投？”
也有网友反问，既然卡扎菲如此好，难道利比亚人民真是瞎了眼睛，去上街示威游行干什么？既然卡扎菲如此关心民间疾苦，那还犯得着用血腥的手段去镇压 民众吗？
此前，《新纪元》杂志比较了卡扎菲与中共政权，得出的结论是：两者相似程度极高。文章谈到，当卡扎菲说出：“中国（共）政府在六四时也用坦克对付示威人群”时，人们才恍然大悟：原来，这位利比亚狂人正是在效仿中共，两者竟有如此多的相似之处。
但是，中共在安理会上，并没有否决对卡扎菲的制裁决议。对此，香港《苹果日报》指出，中共这样做，主要是顾及名声与提升国际地位﹔但又担心多国关注人权，终有一天会闹到自己头上，中共陷入两难境地。
这篇名为《中共扭扭捏捏撑老朋友卡扎菲》的报导指出，对利比亚狂人卡扎菲，中共是又爱又恨，但以爱为主，恨只是恨铁不成钢，恨他控制不住局势。官媒对利比亚局势的报导“扭扭捏捏”，立场貌似公正而实则偏向卡扎菲。
文中透露，3月26号，央视为了支持卡扎菲，竟将利比亚民众欢迎联军，举出“法国万岁”（Vive le France）标语的画面，解说成民众集会支持卡扎菲。
一直以来，大陆官媒总是强调“不干涉内政”“不干涉主权”，来批评多国对卡扎菲政权的制裁。但民众有不同的想法。《法国国际广播电台》特意对《凯迪》网站论坛登出的部分有关“人权与主权”的讨论做了整理。
网友“冷眼观世”写道：有人说，英美法干涉了利比亚内政。这样的指责是虚伪无知的。利比亚是谁的利比亚？是暴君卡扎菲的利比亚？还是人民的利比亚？当然是后者的。
有网友跟帖说：主权不是挡箭牌，内政不是遮羞布。
一篇来自《网易》的转贴则指出，在当代国际关系中，主权让位已成常态，所谓的“不干涉原则”已经逐渐溶解。贴文最后说：“主权神圣，但它并不比人权更高﹔主权唯一，但它并不为特定政权所有。无论用什么手段，保护利比亚平民免遭独裁者的蹂躏，比维护一个屡屡作恶的政权重要得多。”
另外，法国《世界报》报导，中共在利比亚有将近75家企业，总投资高达200亿美元。
新唐人记者李谦、周天综合报导。
“Internal Affairs Are Not a Fig Leaf”
Wang Houli, a former Chinese ambassador in Libya
wrote an article to praise Libyan dictator Gaddafi,
causing denouncing online. Netizens questioned,
if Gaddafi is right, why will he brutally suppress
his people? Why all mass murderers happen to be
friends of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)?
HK media published in-depth analysis
on the CCP’s stand and ambivalence to Gaddafi.
The original article was published in China’s official
media, News of the World, written by Wang Houli,
who was assigned a Chinese ambassador to Libya
in 1989. In the article, Wang recalled his many
private meetings with Gaddafi and access
to special “courtesies". Wang titled the article
“A True Gaddafi",and deliberately whitewashed
the Libyan leader. However once published online
it was immediately denounced by netizens.
Netizens on Netease commented that
this ambassador was blind on choices,
and could not see the evils of Gaddafi,
but arbitrarily justified Gaddafi’s crimes.
A netizen said, “I am really confused, why are those
dictators and mass murderers all your (CCP) friends?
Is this being sympathetic, or being like-minded?”
Another netizen wrote that if Gaddafi is so good,
isn’t it too ignorant of the Libyan people
to demonstrate on the streets? And if Gaddafi
is so concerned about people’s suffering,
is it sensible to use bloody repression on people?
Epoch Weekly compared Gaddafi’s and the CCP’s
governments and concluded that the two
are very similar. When Gaddafi said, “the CCP
also used tanks to suppress crowds in 1989″,
people got the hint that this Libyan despot
is following the example of the CCP,
and the two had so many similarities.
But in the United Nations Security Council,
the CCP did not veto the Resolution on sanctions
against Gaddafi. HK’s Apple Daily pointed out,
that the reason for CCP not vetoing the Resolution,
is its concern for its own international status.
CCP is also worried that it can become a target itself
if many countries show concern for human rights.
Therefore the CCP was facing a dilemma.
The article titled “Communist" Mixed Support to
Old Friend Gaddafi’ says to the Libyan tyrant that
the CCP loves and hates him at the same time,
with mostly loving him but the hate preventing them
from turning the iron into steel and from being able
to control the situation. China’s official media
have published mixed reports on Libya’s situation,
and seemingly just, they are partial to Gaddafi.
The article also revealed on March 26, that CCTV
explained the scenes of Libyans welcoming
Western Allies with banners “Vive le France"
as being in support of Gaddafi.
All along, the mainland official media have always
emphasized the “non-interference of internal affairs"
and “non-interference in sovereignty" to criticize
multinational sanctions against Gaddafi’s regime.
But people have different views. Radio France
Internationale has specially posted discussions
on “human rights and sovereignty" on “Cadillac".
Netizen “Cold view of the world" wrote that
some say Britain, U.S. and France have intervened
in Libya’s internal affairs, which is false and ignorant.
Who owns Libya? Is it the dictator Gaddafi,
or the people? Apparently it isn’t the latter.
A follow up post said, sovereignty is not a shield,
and internal affairs are not a fig leaf.
A post transferred from Netease states that
in current international affairs, sovereignty yielding
(to human rights) is very common, and so called
non-intervention policy gradually dissolves.
Sovereignty is sacred but is not above human rights;
it is sole, but is not owned by a certain government.
Using any methods, the key is to protect Libyans
from a dictator than to guard an evil regime.
Le Monde reported that the CCP
owned about 75 businesses in Libya,
and its total capital there is up to USD20 billion.
NTD reporters Li Qian and Zhou Tian
