The Anti-Empire Report
September 1st, 2011
by William Blum
www.killinghope.org
Libya and the world we live in
"Why are you attacking us? Why are you killing our children? Why are you
destroying our infrastructure?"
>– Television address by Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi, April 30, 2011
A few hours later NATO hit a target in Tripoli, killing Gaddafi's
29-year-old son Saif al-Arab, three of Gaddafi's grandchildren, all
under twelve years of age, and several friends and neighbors.
In his TV address, Gaddafi had appealed to the NATO nations for a
cease-fire and negotiations after six weeks of bombings and cruise
missile attacks against his country.
Well, let's see if we can derive some understanding of the complex Libyan
turmoil.
The Holy Triumvirate — The United States, NATO and the European Union —
recognizes no higher power and believes, literally, that it can do
whatever it wants in the world, to whomever it wants, for as long as it
wants, and call it whatever it wants, like "humanitarian".
If The Holy Triumvirate decides that it doesn't want to overthrow the
government in Syria or in Egypt or Tunisia or Bahrain or Saudi Arabia
or Yemen or Jordan, no matter how cruel, oppressive, or religiously
intolerant those governments are with their people, no matter how much
they impoverish and torture their people, no matter how many protesters
they shoot dead in their Freedom Square, the Triumvirate will simply not
overthrow them.
If the Triumvirate decides that it wants to overthrow the government
of Libya, though that government is secular and has used its oil wealth
for the benefit of the people of Libya and Africa perhaps more than any
government in all of Africa and the Middle East, but keeps insisting
over the years on challenging the Triumvirate's imperial ambitions in
Africa and raising its demands on the Triumvirate's oil companies, then
the Triumvirate will simply overthrow the government of Libya.
If the Triumvirate wants to punish Gaddafi and his sons it will
arrange with the Triumvirate's friends at the International Criminal
Court to issue arrest warrants for them.
If the Triumvirate doesn't want to punish the leaders of Syria,
Egypt, Tunisia, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Jordan it will simply
not ask the ICC to issue arrest warrants for them. Ever since the Court first
formed in 1998, the United States has refused to ratify it and
has done its best to denigrate it and throw barriers in its way because
Washington is concerned that American officials might one day be
indicted for their many war crimes and crimes against humanity. Bill
Richardson, as US ambassador to the UN, said to the world in 1998 that
the United States should be exempt from the court's prosecution because
it has "special global responsibilities". But this doesn't stop the
United States from using the Court when it suits the purposes of
American foreign policy.
If the Triumvirate wants to support a rebel military force to
overthrow the government of Libya then it does not matter how
fanatically religious, al-Qaeda-related,1 executing-beheading-torturing,
monarchist, or factionally split various groups of that rebel force are at
times, the Triumvirate will support
it, as it did certain forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, and hope that
after victory the Libyan force will not turn out as jihadist as it did
in Afghanistan, or as fratricidal as in Iraq. One potential source of
conflict within the rebels, and within the country if ruled by them, is
that a constitutional declaration made by the rebel council states that, while
guaranteeing democracy and the rights of non-Muslims, "Islam is
the religion of the state and the principle source of legislation in
Islamic Jurisprudence."2
Adding to the list of the rebels' charming qualities we have the
Amnesty International report that the rebels have been conducting mass
arrests of black people across the nation, terming all of them "foreign
mercenaries" but with growing evidence that a large number were simply
migrant workers. Reported Reuters (August 29): "On Saturday,
reporters saw the putrefying bodies of 22 men of African origin on a
Tripoli beach. Volunteers who had come to bury them said they were
mercenaries whom rebels had shot dead." To complete this portrait of
the West's newest darlings we have this report from The Independent of London
(August 27): "The killings were pitiless. They had taken
place at a makeshift hospital, in a tent marked clearly with the symbols of the
Islamic crescent. Some of the dead were on stretchers, attached to intravenous
drips. Some were on the back of an ambulance that had
been shot at. A few were on the ground, seemingly attempting to crawl
to safety when the bullets came."
If the Triumvirate's propaganda is clever enough and deceptive enough and
paints a graphic picture of Gaddafi-initiated high tragedy in
Libya, many American and European progressives will insist that though
they never, ever support imperialism they're making an exception this
time because ...
* The Libyan people are being saved from a "massacre", both actual
and potential. This massacre, however, seems to have been grossly
exaggerated by the Triumvirate, al Jazeera TV, and that
station's owner, the government of Qatar; and nothing approaching
reputable evidence of a massacre has been offered, neither a mass grave
or anything else; the massacre stories appear to be on a par with the
Viagra-rape stories spread by al Jazeera (the Fox News of the Libyan uprising).
Qatar, it should be noted, has played an
active military role in the civil war on the side of NATO. It should be
further noted that the main massacre in Libya has been six months of
daily Triumvirate bombing, killing an unknown number of people and
ruining much of the infrastructure. Michigan U. Prof. Juan Cole, the
quintessential true-believer in the good intentions of American foreign
policy who nevertheless manages to have a regular voice in progressive
media, recently wrote that "Qaddafi was not a man to compromise ... his
military machine would mow down the revolutionaries if it were allowed
to." Is that clear, class? We all know of course that Sarkozy, Obama,
and Cameron made compromises without end in their devastation of Libya;
they didn't, for example, use any nuclear weapons.
* The United Nations gave its approval for military intervention;
i.e., the leading members of the Triumvirate gave their approval, after
Russia and China cowardly abstained instead of exercising their veto
power; (perhaps hoping to receive the same courtesy from the US, UK and
France when Russia or China is the aggressor nation).
* The people of Libya are being "liberated", whatever in the world
that means, now or in the future. Gaddafi is a "dictator" they insist. That
may indeed be the proper term to use for the man, but it must
still be asked: Is he a relatively benevolent dictator or is he the
other kind so favored by Washington? It must also be asked: Since the
United States has habitually supported dictators for the entire past
century, why not this one?
The Triumvirate, and its fawning media, would have the world believe
that what's happened in Libya is just another example of the Arab
Spring, a popular uprising by non-violent protestors against a dictator
for the proverbial freedom and democracy, spreading spontaneously from
Tunisia and Egypt, which sandwich Libya. But there are several reasons
to question this analysis in favor of seeing the Libyan rebels' uprising as a
planned and violent attempt to take power in behalf of their own
political movement, however heterogeneous that movement might appear to
be in its early stage. For example:
1. They soon began flying the flag of the monarchy that Gaddafi had
overthrown
2. They were an armed and violent rebellion almost from the
beginning; within a few days, we could read of "citizens armed with
weapons seized from army bases"3 and of "the policemen who had participated in
the clash were caught and hanged by protesters"4
3. Their revolt took place not in the capital but in the heart of the
country's oil region; they then began oil production and declared that
foreign countries would be rewarded oil-wise in relation to how much
each country aided their cause
4. They soon set up a Central Bank, a rather bizarre thing for a
protest movement
5. International support came quickly, even beforehand, from Qatar and
al Jazeera to the CIA and French intelligence
The notion that a leader does not have the right to put down an armed rebellion
against the state is too absurd to discuss.
Not very long ago, Iraq and Libya were the two most modern and
secular states in the Mideast/North Africa world with perhaps the
highest standards of living in the region. Then the United States of
America came along and saw fit to make a basket case of each one. The
desire to get rid of Gaddafi had been building for years; the Libyan
leader had never been a reliable pawn; then the Arab Spring provided the
excellent opportunity and cover. As to Why? Take your pick of the
following:
* Gaddafi's plans to conduct Libya's trading in Africa in raw
materials and oil in a new currency — the gold African dinar, a change
that could have delivered a serious blow to the US's dominant position
in the world economy. (In 2000, Saddam Hussein announced Iraqi oil
would be traded in euros, not dollars; sanctions and an invasion
followed.) For further discussion see here.
* A host-country site for Africom, the US Africa Command, one of six
regional commands the Pentagon has divided the world into. Many
African countries approached to be the host have declined, at times in
relatively strong terms. Africom at present is headquartered in
Stuttgart, Germany. According to a State Department official: "We've
got a big image problem down there. ... Public opinion is really against
getting into bed with the US. They just don't trust the US."5
* An American military base to replace the one closed down by
Gaddafi after he took power in 1969. There's only one such base in
Africa, in Djibouti. Watch for one in Libya sometime after the dust has
settled. It'll perhaps be situated close to the American oil wells.
Or perhaps the people of Libya will be given a choice — an American base or a
NATO base.
* Another example of NATO desperate to find a raison d'être for its
existence since the end of the Cold War and the Warsaw Pact.
* Gaddafi's role in creating the African Union. The corporate
bosses never like it when their wage slaves set up a union. The Libyan
leader has also supported a United States of Africa for he knows that an Africa
of 54 independent states will continue to be picked off one by
one and abused and exploited by the members of the Triumvirate. Gaddafi has
moreover demanded greater power for smaller countries in the United Nations.
* The claim by Gaddafi's son, Saif el Islam, that Libya had helped to
fund Nicolas Sarkozy's election campaign6 could have humiliated the French
president and explain his
obsessiveness and haste in wanting to be seen as playing the major role
in implementing the "no fly zone" and other measures against Gaddafi. A
contributing factor may have been the fact that France has been
weakened in its former colonies and neo-colonies in Africa and the
Middle East, due in part to Gaddafi's influence.
* Gaddafi has been an outstanding supporter of the Palestinian cause
and critic of Israeli policies; and on occasion has taken other African and
Arab countries, as well as the West, to task for their not matching his
policies or rhetoric; one more reason for his lack of popularity
amongst world leaders of all stripes.
* In January, 2009, Gaddafi made known that he was considering
nationalizing the foreign oil companies in Libya.7 He also has another
bargaining chip: the prospect of utilizing Russian, Chinese and Indian oil
companies. During the current period of
hostilities, he invited these countries to make up for lost production. But
such scenarios will now not take place. The Triumvirate will
instead seek to privatize the National Oil Corporation, transferring
Libya's oil wealth into foreign hands.
* The American Empire is troubled by any threat to its hegemony.
In the present historical period the empire is concerned mainly with
Russia and China. China has extensive energy investments and
construction investments in Libya and elsewhere in Africa. The average
American neither knows nor cares about this. The average American
imperialist cares greatly, if for no other reason than in this time of
rising demands for cuts to the military budget it's vital that powerful
"enemies" be named and maintained.
* For yet more reasons, see the article "Why Regime Change in Libya?"
by Ismael Hossein-zadeh, and the US diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks —
Wikileaks reference 07TRIPOLI967 11-15-07 (includes a complaint about Libyan
"resource nationalism")
A word from the man the world's mightiest military powers have been trying to
kill
"Recollections of My Life", written by Col. Muammar Gaddafi, April 8, 2011,
excerpts:
Now, I am under attack by the biggest force in military history, my little
African son, Obama wants to kill me, to take away the freedom of our country,
to take away our free housing, our free medicine, our free education, our free
food, and replace it with American style thievery,
called "capitalism," but all of us in the Third World know what that
means, it means corporations run the countries, run the world, and the
people suffer, so, there is no alternative for me, I must make my stand, and if
Allah wishes, I shall die by following his path, the path that
has made our country rich with farmland, with food and health, and even
allowed us to help our African and Arab brothers and sisters to work
here with us ... I do not wish to die, but if it comes to that, to save
this land, my people, all the thousands who are all my children, then so be it.
... In the West, some have called me "mad", "crazy". They know
the truth but continue to lie, they know that our land is independent
and free, not in the colonial grip.
The state of our beloved capitalist system, early 21st century
I pay attention to the fat content of my food, so I was pleased to
find a can of Pam canola oil cooking spray that had 0 grams fat per
serving. Great, can't do better than zero fat, can you? I used it
often for a few months ... until one day I took a closer look at the
"Nutrition Facts" ... Yes, it said 0 grams fat per serving. A serving. How
big was that? Let's see ... "Serving Size about 1/4 second spray"
... Hmmm, how does one press down on a button for 1/4 second? Is it
humanly possible? Even the manufacturer had to say "about". I had been taken.
My hat is off to you Capitalist Robber Barons — You're good!
________________________________
The Dow Jones industrial average of blue-chip stocks fell 635 points on Monday
August 8.
On Tuesday it rose by 430 points.
Wednesday, the market, in its infinite wisdom, decided to fall again; this time
by 520 points.
And on Thursday ... yes, it rose once again, by 423 points.
The Dow changed directions for eight consecutive trading sessions.
Upon such marvels of mankind countless people build careers, others
wager their life savings, philanthropic foundations and universities
risk much of their endowments, and conservative sages deliver sermons to the
world on the wisdom and sacredness of the free market.
Main Street is the climax of civilization.
>That this Ford car might stand in front of
>the Bon Ton store, Hannibal invaded Rome
>and Erasmus wrote in Oxford cloisters.
>– Sinclair Lewis, "Main Street", 1920
Do the economic fundamentals really change dramatically overnight?
Or is our economic system as psycho as our foreign policy? The Washington
Post's senior economic columnist, Steven Pearlstein, wrote on August 14th of
the four days described above: "I suppose there are some schnooks who
actually believe that those wild swings in stock prices last week
represented sober and serious concerns by thoughtful, sophisticated
investors about the Treasury debt downgrade or European sovereign debt
or a slowdown in global growth. But surely such perceptions don't
radically change each afternoon between 2 and 4:30, when the market
averages last week were gyrating out of control."
________________________________
Last month "Pope Benedict XVI denounced the profit-at-all-cost
mentality that he says is behind Europe's economic crisis" as he arrived in
hard-hit Spain. "The economy doesn't function with market
self-regulation but needs an ethical reason to work for mankind," he
declared. "Man must be at the center of the economy, and the economy
cannot be measured only by maximization of profit but rather according
to the common good."8
"I am a Marxist," said the Dalai Lama last year. Marxism has "moral ethics,
whereas capitalism is only how to make profits."9
"I don't believe in anything," said Barack Obama. "At least not really
strongly." (No, I made that one up.)
________________________________
Perhaps the worst outcome of the United States "winning the Cold War" is that
countless progressive people think there's no alternative to
the capitalist system. Seventy years of anti-communist education and
media stamped in people's minds a lasting association between socialism
and what the Soviet Union called communism. Socialism meant a
dictatorship, it meant Stalinist repression, a suffocating "command
economy", no freedom of enterprise, no freedom to change jobs, few
avenues for personal expression, and other similar truths and untruths. This
is a set of beliefs clung to even amongst many Americans opposed
to US foreign policy. No matter how bad the economy is, Americans
think, the only alternative available is something called "communism",
and they know how awful that is.
Meanwhile, the Communist Party USA has endorsed Barack Obama for re-election.10
________________________________
"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living in
society, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal
system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."
>– Frederic Bastiat, (1801-1850) French economist, statesman, and author
Notes
1. For example, see: The Telegraph (London),
August 30, 2011: "Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has
said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines
of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime." There is a
plethora of other reports detailing the ties between the rebels and
radical Islamist groups. ↩
2. Washington Post, August 31, 2011
3. McClatchy Newspapers, February 20, 2011 ↩
4. Wikipedia, Timeline of the 2011 Libyan civil war, February 19, 2011 ↩
5. The Guardian (London), June 25, 2007 ↩
6. The Guardian (London), March 16, 2011 ↩
7. Reuters, January 21, 2009 ↩
8. Associated Press, August 11, 2011 ↩
9. Agence France Presse, May 21, 2010↩
10. "Yikes! Look who just endorsed Obama for 4 more years",
WorldNetDaily, August 3 2011↩
–
William Blum is the author of:
* Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War 2
* Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
* West-Bloc Dissident: A Cold War Memoir
* Freeing the World to Death: Essays on the American Empire
Portions of the books can be read, and signed copies purchased, at
www.killinghope.org
Previous Anti-Empire Reports can be read at this website.
To add yourself to this mailing list simply send an email to bblum6 [at]
aol.com with "add" in the subject line. I'd like your name and city in the
message, but that's optional. I ask for your city only in case I'll be
speaking in your area.
(Or put "remove" in the subject line to do the opposite.)
Any part of this report may be disseminated without permission. I'd appreciate
it if the website were mentioned.
http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer97.html
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
