Iran would have been attacked even if it gave up its nuclear and ballistic programs, because the same happened to Libya, as the West does not honor its agreements, according to a statement falsely attributed to Muammar Gaddafi’s daughter and amplified by extremist MEP Diana Șoșoacă. In fact, the NATO intervention in Libya was mandated by the UN following the crimes of the Libyan regime.
NEWS: Gaddafi's daughter's message to Iran! Pay attention!
Allow me to give you this warning: do not be seduced by the beloved words and slogans of Western imperialists. These are the same people who told my father: "If you give up your nuclear and ballistic programs, the doors to the world will open for you”. My father, led by goodwill and faith in dialogue, chose the path of reconciliation. However, we saw how NATO bombings reduced Libya to ashes and bloodshed [...] Any compromise with the imperials brings nothing but destruction, division and suffering [...]
NARRATIVE: The West would have attacked Iran even if an agreement had been reached, because it had done the same in Libya when the country had agreed to renounce its arsenals.
PURPOSE: To promote anti-Western and, by extension, anti-Semitic rhetoric. To stir and amplify social unrest. To validate previously promoted conspiracy theories.
Aisha Gaddafi does not officially communicate in English
WHY THE NARRATIVE IS FALSE: The text attributed to Aisha Gaddafi originally appeared in January 2026 on several social media platforms, being quickly picked up by influencers with millions of followers, such as Mario Nawfal, known for his critical views on Israel's foreign policy and military actions. The text in English claims that Aisha Gaddafi is addressing the Iranian people, whom she warns about the danger of making concessions to the West, “drawing on” Libya's own experience.
From the very onset, the message raises major red flags, considering that, when Aisha Gaddafi has conveyed public messages in the past, she has done so in Arabic, either through official statements or declarations for Arabic-language media. Therefore, the fact that such a sensitive political message from Aisha Gaddafi would be published directly in English, without an official Arabic version, is unusual, to say the least. Moreover, expressions such as “freedom-loving people”, “global solidarity” and “Western trap” in the text are typical of Western online discourse, not that of a native Arabic speaker. The text has a style very close to generic anti-Western rhetoric, using expressions frequently encountered in propaganda posts or online activism. Furthermore, the message contains no concrete details, specific personal references or specific mentions of Libya that would suggest an authentic direct experience. Rather, the wording is typical of a “geopolitical motivational” text.
Perhaps most importantly, so far, there is absolutely no confirmation of the message's authenticity from any official social media account associated with Aisha Gaddafi or any close member of her family, nor from any major international news agency. The only channels on which the text in question is still being circulated are social media platforms and obscure conspiracy publications. Although there are several X accounts, for example, that use the name Aisha Gaddafi (@aishagaddafi111, @AishaGa27918121, @AyeshaGaddafi8, etc.), none of these appear to be a verified account or confirmed as belonging to Muammar Gaddafi’s daughter.
A few days after the initial appearance of the text, the Jordanian news portal Khaberni published a disclaimer attributed to Aisha Gaddafi, in which she categorically denied the authenticity of the message circulating on the Internet. She said that she has “her own channels for expressing her political or humanitarian opinions and positions” and does not rely on “unofficial pages or platforms”. Furthermore, Aisha Gaddafi requested the “removal of the falsely attributed message” and called on media institutions and social media users to ensure the accuracy and credibility of the information they distribute and not to launch rumors or unverified news that mislead public opinion. The article also claimed that the disclaimer appeared “on the media page representing the Gaddafi family”, without indicating, however, which one it is, which raises questions even about this second message attributed to Aisha Gaddafi.
Discarding its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction pulled Libya out of international isolation. The NATO operation targeting Gaddafi was sanctioned in order to prevent the massacre of civilians
Muammar Gaddafi voluntarily gave up his programs of mass destruction for fear he would share the fate of Saddam Hussein, after Iraq had been invaded for allegedly still possessing an arsenal of such weapons (a claim which proved to be untrue). During that same period, Gaddafi also agreed to pay $2.7 billion in compensation for the terrorist attack in which a Pan Am aircraft had been blown up and 270 people lost their lives in 1988. Prior to that point, Libya was a state that financed terrorism and was subject to American and international sanctions, just like Iran. Once Tripoli took these steps, a period of detente followed in relations with the West and the United States, as well as reintegration into the international community.
In 2011, at the height of the Arab Spring, anti-government protests broke out in Libya, to which the regime's forces responded brutally, firing live ammunition at the crowds of protesters. This brutal repression generated armed resistance from insurgents, which led to the outbreak of a civil war, in which Gaddafi's forces operated with a strength far superior to the rebels. Amid suspicions that government forces were committing crimes against humanity, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 1973, which provided for the imposition of a no-fly zone, which subsequently justified the aerial intervention of a NATO-led coalition against Gaddafi's forces. Therefore, the intervention against the Libyan regime has no connection to the violation of any agreement, nor to the abandonment of Libya's programs for weapons of mass destruction.
The Islamist regime in Tehran has been aggressive since its foundation and never intended to give up its ballistic arsenal
Iran, just like Libya for a period of time, has sponsored various terrorist groups (Hamas, Hezbollah, the Islamic Jihad) or armed militias, ever since the ayatollahs took power. These groups have been behind numerous terrorist attacks targeting the United States and Israel since the 1980s. Iran has never given up its support for these groups, even when facing economic difficulties due to the sanctions imposed against it.
With regard to Iran’s nuclear program, it was subjected to international sanctions precisely because of suspicions regarding its military dimension. These suspicions were also fueled both by Tehran's refusal to allow international inspectors access to nuclear facilities, and by their military-grade fortification. After Tehran accepted to sign an international agreement in exchange for the removal of sanctions, and the United States withdrew from the agreement, the Iranians started enriching uranium to a level far beyond what is necessary for civilian applications, which generated further suspicions. As tensions escalated, Tehran agreed to negotiate the limitation of its nuclear program, but excluded any discussions regarding its ballistic program, which is intended to allow it to hit targets throughout the region and even in Europe.
BACKGROUND: The daughter of the former Libyan dictator enjoyed a certain amount of notoriety while her father ruled Libya. Aisha Gaddafi is a lawyer by profession and was part of the defense team for another dictator ousted from power by the USA, the Iraqi Saddam Hussein. She was appointed “ambassador of goodwill” for the UN Development Programme (UNDP), but the title was withdrawn in 2011 during the conflict in Libya, following her public appearances in which she defended her father and his regime. Prior to 2011, Western media often depicted her as the “glamour daughter” of the dictator due to her lifestyle, and she was considered one of Gaddafi's most influential and high-profile children.
After her father’s death in 2011, Aisha Gaddafi left Libya and was granted asylum in Algeria, and later settled in Oman, where she is believed to still live today, thanks to a discreetly negotiated diplomatic arrangement, without a constant or verified public presence. Authorities in Oman do not provide public information about her status or activities, and although her name has appeared in various international investigations and sanctions after 2011, she has never been brought before any court. Over the years, there have been several occasional messages attributed to her on social media, in which she commemorated the death of her father or brothers, without addressing any of the world's major topics.
Since the start of Israeli-American hostilities in Iran, the sovereignist movement in Romania is in utter disarray, not knowing whether to continue to support the MAGA ideology, or criticize the fact that its main exponent, American President Donald Trump, attacked a sovereign state, eliminating its main leaders and the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Diana Șoșoacă, who has long been accused of spreading Legionnaire and anti-Semitic propaganda, decided to continue her fight with the “cabal led by Zionists” even if this involves declaratively attacking the American leader as well. Regarding Diana Șoșoacă, the politician needs no introduction. She is already well known for picking up and distributing almost all obviously false narratives without minimal verification. Thus, she announced in August 2025 that JD Vance said Romania is a French colony. The same year, in July, she claimed that China broke the Israeli blockade in Gaza. To this day, she continues to promote anti-Western and anti-Semitic narratives in which she defends the Legionnaire Movement.
The violation of agreements, a favorite tactic of Russia, which did in Ukraine exactly what the false narrative says the West was supposed to do in Iran
The narrative regarding the violation of agreements by the West seems to be inspired from the real world, only the actors are different: Russia and Ukraine. Through the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Ukraine agreed to give up its nuclear arsenal, the third largest in the world, in exchange for security guarantees and territorial integrity offered by world states, including Moscow. Russia, however, chose to violate the memorandum by invading Ukraine, unprovoked, initially in 2014 and subsequently, on a large scale, in 2022. Diana Șoșoacă did not condemn that large-scale invasion in any way. On the contrary, she has constantly shown her support for Russia's acts and hostility towards Ukraine.
Check sources:
---copie-image.webp)
