If you’re referring to the claim that the CIA or NATO overthrew Libya because Muammar Gaddafi was going to destroy the “petrodollar” with a gold-backed African currency, the story appears to have originated from a combination of real events, leaked emails, and later speculation. The key source was a 2011 email sent by political adviser Sidney Blumenthal to Hillary Clinton. The email claimed Gaddafi possessed large gold reserves and intended to create a pan-African gold-backed currency that would compete with the CFA franc used in parts of Africa. It also claimed French intelligence viewed this as a threat and that it influenced France’s support for intervention in Libya. After Clinton’s emails became public in 2015–2016, many commentators and alternative media outlets expanded this into the broader claim that the United States and NATO intervened primarily to protect the U.S. dollar or the “petrodollar system.” There are a few important distinctions: Gaddafi had publicly discussed greater African monetary independence and a gold-backed African currency at various times. Evidence that Libya was close to launching such a currency is limited. There is no publicly available evidence from NATO governments showing that protecting the dollar was a stated or primary reason for intervention. Historians and analysts generally point to the Libyan civil war, fears of civilian massacres in Benghazi, regional instability, European security concerns, and Libya’s oil resources as the main documented reasons for intervention, though debate continues about the relative importance of each factor. So the “Gaddafi was killed because of the petrodollar” narrative largely traces back to the leaked Blumenthal email and its subsequent amplification in alternative media and conspiracy-focused circles after 2015.
