Libya is in turmoil, tore up by tribal nonsense. Now, let's talk about context.
Libya under strong leadership had the potential to project its wealth towards helping to develop Africa. Gadaffi did/tried to use the country's wealth to set up an exclusively African Monetary Fund, African Central Bank, African Investment bank, an African communications satellite etc. He supported organisations and regimes in other African countries, such as ANC in South Africa. The saintly Nelson Mandela called Gadaffi his brother.
Link
So perhaps Gadaffi was motivated by Pan-Africanism. Or perhaps motivated by selfish reasons, I.E. to build support for his regime. Studying Gadaffi's life and come-up makes the former plausible but in the end it's all debatable. From my position it's not possible to ascertain Gadaffi's true motivations. But see, it's not really relevant, because with a strong Libyan state at least the potential would always exist. And in that sense, a strong Libyan state is simply never in the Western powers' best interest.
Gadaffi had been a thorn in the West's side for a long time. The Arab Spring provided an opportunity to take him out and send the country into turmoil with relative ease, seeing as Lybia is a fairly isolated place unlike for instance Syria. Providing arms to opposing tribes and air strikes was a cheap price to pay, and what happens after is of no real concern so long as it doesn't involve the formation of a new strong regime. Tribal warfare and the short-term presence of a few Marines, drones and a couple of warships will insure this.
I suppose whether you buy this line of thought depends on your world view. But it does fit perfectly well within the divide and conquer M.O. that has been employed by America and Europe in the Third World.