Libya: Is Washington Pushing for Civil War to Justify a US-NATO
Military Intervention?
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya
Is Tripoli being set up for a civil war to justify U.S. and NATO
military intervention in oil-rich Libya?
Are the talks about sanctions a prelude to an Iraq-like intervention?
Something is Rotten in the so-called "Jamahiriya" of Libya
There is no question that Colonel Muammar Al-Gaddafi (Al-Qaddafi) is a
dictator. He has been the dictator and so-called "qaid" of Libya for
about 42 years. Yet, it appears that tensions are being ratcheted up
and the flames of revolt are being fanned inside Libya. This includes
earlier statements by the British Foreign Secretary William Hague that
Colonel Qaddafi had fled Libya to Venezuela. [1] This statement served
to electrify the revolt against Qaddafi and his regime in Libya.
Although all three have dictatorship in common, Qaddafi's Libya is
quite different from Ben Ali's Tunisia or Mubarak's Egypt. The Libyan
leadership is not outright subservient to the United States and the
European Union. Unlike the cases of Tunisia and Egypt, the
relationship that exists between Qaddafi and both the U.S. and E.U. is
a modus vivendi. Simply put, Qaddafi is an independent Arab dictator
and not a "managed dictator" like Ben Ali and Mubarak.
In Tunisia and Egypt the status quo prevails, the military machine and
neo-liberalism remain intact; this works for the interests of the
United States and the European Union. In Libya, however, upsetting the
established order is a U.S. and E.U. objective.
The U.S. and the E.U. now seek to capitalize on the revolt against
Qaddafi and his dictatorship with the hopes of building a far stronger
position in Libya than ever before. Weapons are also being brought
into Libya from its southern borders to promote revolt. The
destabilization of Libya would also have significant implications for
North Africa, West Africa, and global energy reserves.
Colonel Qaddafi in Brief Summary
Qaddafi's rise to power started as a Libyan captain amongst a group of
military officers who carried out a coup d'état. The 1969 coup was
against the young Libyan monarchy of King Idris Al-Sanusi. Under the
monarchy Libya was widely seen as being acquiescent to U.S. and
Western European interests.
Although he has no official state or government position, Qaddafi has
nurtured and deeply rooted a political culture of cronyism,
corruption, and privilege in Libya since the 1969 coup. Added to this
is the backdrop of the "cult of personality" that he has also enforced
in Libya.
Qaddafi has done everything to portray himself as a hero to the
masses, specifically the Arabs and Africans. His military adventures
in Chad were also tied to leaving his mark in history and creating a
client state by carving up Chad. Qaddafi's so-called "Green Book" has
been forcefully portrayed and venerated as being a great feat in
political thought and philosophy. Numerous intellectuals have been
forced or bribed to praise it.
Over the years, Colonel Qaddafi has tried to cultivate a romantic
figure of himself as a simple man of the people. This includes
pretending to live in a tent. He has done everything to make himself
stand out. His reprimanding of other Arab dictators, such as King
Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, at Arab League meetings have made headlines
and have been welcomed by many Arabs. While on state visits he has
deliberately surrounded himself with an entourage of female body
guards with the intent of getting heads to turn. Moreover, he has also
presented himself as a so-called imam or leader of the Muslims and a
man of God, lecturing about Islam in and outside of Libya.
Libya is run by a government under Qaddafi's edicts. Fear and cronyism
have been the keys to keeping so-called "order" in Libya amongst
officials and citizens alike. Libyans and foreigners alike have been
killed and have gone missing for over four decades. The case of
Lebanon's Musa Al-Sadr, the founder of the Amal Movement, is one of
the most famous of these cases and has always been a hindrance to
Lebanese-Libyan relations. Qaddafi has had a very negative effect in
creating and conditioning an entire hierarchy of corrupt officials in
Tripoli. Each one looks out for their own interests at the expense of
the Libyan people.
Fractions and Tensions inside the Hierarchy of Qaddafi's Regime
Because of the nature of Qaddafi's regime in Tripoli, there are a lot
of internal tensions in Libya and within the regime structure itself.
One of these sets of tensions is between Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and his
father's circle of older ministers. Libyan ministers are generally
divided amongst those that gather around Saif Al-Islam and those that
are part of the "old guard."
There are even tensions between Qaddafi and his sons. In 1999,
Mutassim Al-Qaddafi tried to ouster his father while Colonel Qaddafi
was outside of Libya. Mutassim Qaddafi holds a Libyan cabinet
portfolio as a national security advisor. He is also famously known
amongst Libyans for being a playboy who has spent much of his time in
Europe and abroad. There is also Khames Gaddafi who runs his own
militia of thugs, which are called the Khames militia. He has always
been thought of as possible contender for succession too against his
other brothers.
There have always been fears in Libya about the issue of succession
after Colonel Qaddafi is gone. Over the years, Qaddafi has thoroughly
purged Libya of any form of organized opposition to him or prevented
anyone else, outside his family, from amassing enough power to
challenge his authority.
The Issue of Loyalty and Defection in Libya
Undoubtedly, little loyalty is felt for Qaddafi and his family. It has
been fear that has kept Libyans in line. At the level of the Libyan
government and the Libyan military it has been both fear and
self-interest that has kept officials, good and corrupt alike, in
line. That mantle of fear has now been dispelled. Statements and
declarations of denunciation against Gaddafi's regime are being heard
from officials, towns, and military barracks across Libya.
Aref Sharif, the head of the Libyan Air Force, has renounced Qaddafi.
Interior Minister Abdul Fatah Al-Yunis (Al-Younis), who is from
Benghazi (Bengasi) and oversees a branch of the special operations
work in Libya, has resigned. Yunis is reported to be Qaddafi's "number
two" or second in charge, but this is incorrect. Abdullah Sanusi, the
head of Libyan Internal Intelligence and Qaddafi's relative through
marriage, is the closest thing to a "number two" within the structure
of power in Tripoli.
Reports have been made about two Libyan pilots defected to Malt and
Libyan naval vessels refusing to attack Benghazi. Defections are
snowballing amongst the military and government. Yet, there must be
pause to analyze the situation.
The Libyan Opposition
At this point, however, it must be asked who is the "opposition" in
Libya. The opposition is not a monolithic body. The common
denominator is the opposition to the rule of Qaddafi and his family.
It has to be said that "actions of opposition or resistance against an
oppressor" and an "opposition movement" are also two different things.
For the most part, the common people and corrupt Libyan officials, who
harbour deep-seated hate towards Qaddafi and his family, are now in
the same camp, but there are differences.
There is an authentic form of opposition, which is not organized, and
a systematic form of opposition, which is either external or led by
figures from within the Libyan regime itself. The authentic people's
internal opposition in Libya is not organized and the people's
"actions of opposition" have been spontaneous. Yet, opposition and
revolt has been encouraged and prompted from outside Libya through
social media networks, international news stations, and events in the
rest of the Arab World. [2]
The leadership of the internal opposition that is emerging in Libya is
coming from within the regime itself. Corrupt officials that have
rebelled against Gaddafi are not the champions of the people. These
opposition figures are not opposed to tyranny; they are merely opposed
to the rule of Colonel Qaddafi and his family. Aref Sharif and
Al-Yunis are themselves Libyan regime figures.
It has to also be considered that some Libyan officials that have
turned against Qaddafi are doing it to save themselves, while others
in the future will work to retain or strengthen their positions. Abdel
Moneim Al-Honi, the Libyan envoy to the Arab League in Cairo, can be
looked at as an example. Al-Honi denounced Qaddafi, but it should be
noted that he was one of the members of the group of Libyan officers
who executed the coup in 1969 with Qaddafi and that later in 1975 he
himself tried to take power in a failed coup. After the failed coup,
he would flee Libya and only return in 1990 after Qaddafi pardoned
him.
Al-Honi is not the only Libyan diplomat to resign. The Libyan
ambassador to India has also done the same. There is an intention on
the part of these officials to be members of the power structure in a
Libya after the ouster of Qaddafi:
Libyan Ambassador to India Ali al-Essawi told the BBC that he was
quitting, opposing his government's violent crackdown on
demonstrators.
Mr. Al-Essawi was reported to be a Minister in Tripoli and could be an
important figure in an alternative government, in case Libyan
President Muammar Qadhafi steps down.
The second Libyan diplomat to put in his papers was Tripoli's
Permanent Representative to the Arab League Abdel Moneim al-Honi, who
said in Cairo that he had quit his job to "join the revolution" in his
country.
"I have submitted my resignation in protest against the acts of
repression and violence against demonstrators, and I am joining the
ranks of the revolution," said Mr. Al-Honi. The Second Secretary
Hussein Sadiq al Musrati, announced his resignation from China, in an
interview with Al-Jazeera, and called on the Army to intervene in the
uprising. [3]
Again, these revolting officials, like Al-Yunis and Sharif, are from
within the regime. They are not mere diplomats, but former ministers.
There is also the possibility that these types of "opposition figures"
could have or could make arrangements with external powers.
External Forces at Play in Libya
The governments of the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, and Italy all
knew very well that Qaddafi was a despot, but this did not stop any of
them from making lucrative deals with Tripoli. When the media covers
the violence in Libya, they should also ask, where are the weapons
being used coming from? The arms sales that the U.S. and the E.U. have
made to Libya should be scrutinized. Is this a part of their democracy
promotion programs?
Since rapprochement between the U.S. and Libya, the military forces of
both countries have moved closer. Libya and the U.S. have had military
transactions and since rapprochement Tripoli has been very interested
in buying U.S. military hardware. [4] In 2009, a Pentagon spokeswoman,
Lieutenant-Colonel Hibner, affirmed this relationship best: "[The
U.S.] will consider Libyan requests for defen[c]e equipment that
enables [Libya] to build capabilities in areas that serve our mutual
interest [or synchronized U.S. and Libyan interests]." [5] The
qualifier here is U.S. interests, meaning that the Pentagon will only
arm Libya on the basis of U.S. interests.
In what seems to have happened overnight, a whole new arsenal of U.S.
military hardware has appeared in Libya. American-made F-16 jets,
Apache helicopters, and ground vehicles are being used inside Libya by
Qaddafi. [6] This is a shocking revelation, if corroborated. There are
no public records about some of this U.S. military hardware in the the
arsenal of the Libyan military. In regards to the F-16s, Libyan jets
are traditionally French-made Mirages and Russian-made MiGs.
Silvio Berlusconi and the Italian government have also been strong
supporters of Qaddafi's regime. There is information coming out of
Libya that Italian pilots are also being used by the Libyan Air Force.
[7] Mercenaries from Chad, Sudan, Niger, and Nigeria are also being
used. This has been verified through video evidence coming out of
Libya. The Libyan regime is also considering contracting American or
European security firms (mercenaries). [8]
The Politics of Al Jazeera
The Libyan government has shut down the internet and phone lines and
an information war is underway. Although one of the most professional
news networks in the world, it has to be cautioned that Al Jazeera is
not a neutral actor. It is subordinate to the Emir of Qatar and the
Qatari government, which is also an autocracy. By picking and choosing
what to report, Al Jazeera's coverage of Libya is biased. This is
evident when one studies Al Jazeera's coverage of Bahrain, which has
been restrained due to political ties between the leaders of Bahrain
and Qatar.
Reports by Al Jazeera about Libyan jets firing on protesters in
Tripoli and the major cities are unverified and questionable. [9]
Hereto, the reports that Libyan jets have been attacking people in the
streets have not been verified. No visual evidence of the jet attacks
has been shown, while visual confirmation about other events have been
coming out of Libya.
Al Jazeera is not alone in its biased reporting from Libya. The Saudi
media is also relishing the events in Libya. Asharq Al-Awsat is a
Saudi-owned paper that is strictly aligned to U.S. interests in the
Middle East-North Africa (MENA) region. Its editor-in-chief is now
running editorials glorifying the Arab League for their decision to
suspend Libya, because of the use of force by Tripoli against Libyans
protesters – why were such steps not taken for Egypt, Tunisia,
Bahrain, or Yemen? Inside and outside the Arab World, the mainstream
media is now creating the conditions for some sort of intervention in
Libya.
The Role of Foreign Interests in Libya
Qaddafi and his sons have run Libya like a private estate. They have
squandered its wealth and natural resources. One of Gaddafi's son's is
known to have paid the American singer Beyoncé Knowles a million or
more U.S. dollars for a private music concert. [10] Foreign
corporations also play a role in this story.
The positions and actions of foreign corporations, the U.S., and the
European Union in regards to Libya should not be ignored.
Questioning the role of foreign governments and corporations in Libya
is very important. The Italian and U.S. governments should be
questioned about the role that pilots of Italian nationality and newly
bought U.S. weaponry are playing in Libya.
It is very clear that democracy is only used as a convenient pretext
against dictators and governments that do not bow down and serve U.S.
and E.U. interests. All one needs to do is to just look at the way
Mutassim Qaddafi was welcomed with open arms in Washington on April
21, 2009 by Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration. Upon their
meeting, Secretary Clinton publicly said:
I am very pleased to welcome Minister Gaddafi to the State Department.
We deeply value the relationship between the United States and Libya.
We have many opportunities to deepen and broaden our cooperation and I
am very much looking forward to building on this relationship. So
Mr.Minister welcome so much here. [11]
What the U.S. and the E.U. want to do now is maximize their gain in
Libya. Civil war seems to be what Brussels and Washington have in
mind.
The Balkanization of Libya and the Push to Civil War
Qaddafi's son Saif Al-Islam has made statements on Libyan television
about deviant Taliban-like faith-based organizations taking over Libya
or attempting to take it over. Nothing is further from the truth. He
has also warned of doom and civil war. This is part of the Qaddafi
family's efforts to retain power over Libya, but a path towards civil
war is unfolding in Libya.
Amongst the ranking members of the military, Mahdi Al-Arab, the deputy
chief of Libya's military staff, was said to have renounced Qaddafi.
[12] Al-Arab, however, has modified his position by saying that he
does not want to see Libya spiral into a civil war that will allow
foreign intervention and tutelage. [13] This is why Al-Arab prevented
the people of his city, Zawarah, from joining the revolt and going to
nearby Tripoli. [14]
The drive towards civil war in Libya is fuelled by two factors. One is
the nature of Qaddafi's regime. The other is an external desire to
divide and weaken Libya.
Qaddafi has always worked to keep Libyans divided. For years there
have been fears that Qaddafi's sons would start a civil war amongst
themselves or that some other high ranking officials could try to
jockey for power once Qaddafi was gone. Civil war on the basis of
ethnicity, regionalism, or tribalism is not a big threat. Tribes and
regions could be co-opted or allied with, but the people that would
spark a civil war are regime figures. The threats of civil war arise
from the rivalries amongst regime officials themselves. Yet, it must
be understood that these rivalries are delibertly being encouraged to
divide Libya.
The flames of revolt are being fanned inside Libya. Chaos in the Arab
World has been viewed as beneficial in many strategic circles in
Washington, Tel Aviv, London, and NATO Headquarters. If Libya falls
into a state of civil war or becomes balkanized this will benefit the
U.S. and the E.U. in the long-term and will have serious geo-political
implications.
All the neighbouring states in North Africa would be destabilized by
the events in Libya. West Africa and Central Africa would also be
destabilized. The tribal boundaries running in Libya and Chad extend
into countries like Niger, Algeria, and Sudan. The chaos in Libya
would also have a significant effect on Europe and global energy.
Already the events in Libya are being used to validate the drive to
control the Arctic Circle and its energy resources. [15]
What Will Be Qaddafi's End?
It is very likely that Qaddafi will not have as fortunate an exit from
power as Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in Egypt. Finding refuge for
Qaddafi will not be easy. In general, Qaddafi is considered a
liability by other governments. Saudi Arabia, which can be portrayed
as a refuge for Arab dictators, will most likely not give Qaddafi
refuge. Libya and Saudi Arabia have bad relations. He is also wanted
for investigation in Lebanon. Generally, Qaddafi's relationship with
the leaders of the Arab petro-sheikhdoms in the Persian Gulf is tense
and negative. He will not be granted refuge anywhere in the Persian
Gulf.
In general, Arab governments will also be afraid to host him. In his
efforts to present himself as a champion of the people, he has
insulted many of his fellow Arab dictators. There is something to be
said, however, when Qaddafi's statements at Arab League meetings or
about Palestine and Iraq are far more popular or candid than the rest
of the Arab dictators.
It is highly improbable that any Latin American, European, or
ex-Soviet countries will give him refuge. A country in sub-Sahara(n)
Africa is the mostly likely place Qaddafi could seek refuge.
His options are limited and he is determined to hold on to power.
Civil War seems to be looming in the horizon. It is highly unlikely
that he will leave Libya peacefully and the U.S. and its allies have
no doubt examined this scenario. On February 23-24, 2010, he met with
the leaders of the three biggest tribes in Libya (Werfala, Tarhouna,
and Wershfana), to secure their support. [16] His own tribe, Qaddafa
is supporting him and it seems that the Madarha and Awlad Slieman
tribes are also supporting him. [17]
The Threats of NATO Intervention and U.S. and E.U. Control over Libya
Libya has been in the cross-hairs of the Pentagon for years. According
to Wesley Clark, the retired general who was the supreme military
commander of NATO, Libya was on a Pentagon list of nations to be
invaded after Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. The list included Iraq,
Somalia, Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, and lastly Iran. In Clark's own words:
So I came back to see him [a high ranking military officer in the
Pentagon] a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in
Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with Iraq?" And he
said, "Oh, it's worse than that." He reached over on his desk. He
picked up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got this down from
upstairs" — meaning the Secretary of Defence's office — "today." And
he said, "This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out
seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria,
Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." [18]
In one way or another all the nations on the list have been attacked
directly or indirectly and all of them, but Syria and Iran, have
succumbed to the U.S. and its allies. Again, the only exceptions are
Iran and its ally Syria. In Lebanon, the U.S. has made partial gains,
but it is now receding with the decline of the Hariri-led March 14
Alliance.
Libya started secret negotiations with Washington in 2001 that
materialized into formal rapprochement after the fall of Baghdad to
British and American troops in 2003. Yet, the U.S. and its allies have
always wanted to expand their influence over the Libyan energy sector
and to appropriate Libya's vast wealth. A civil war provides the best
cover for this.
Libyans Must Be Aware of the Pretext of Humanitarian Intervention
The Libyan people should be on their high guards. In is clear that the
U.S. and the E.U. are supporting both sides. The U.S. and the E.U. are
not the allies of the people of the Arab World. In this regard, the
U.S. supports Qaddafi on the ground through military hardware, while
it also supports the "opposition." If the so-called Western
governments were serious about democracy, they would have cut their
business ties to Libya, specifically in the energy sector, before
2011.
Both Washington and the powers in Brussels could co-opt opposition
forces. They have supported Gaddafi, but they do not control him or
his regime like they controlled Ben Ali in Tunisia and Mubarak in
Egypt. Libya is a very different story. The objectives of Washington
and Brussels will be to strengthen their control over Libya either
through regime change or civil war.
"Actions of opposition to Gaddafi" are strong, but there is no strong
organized "opposition movement." The two are different. Nor is
democracy guaranteed, because of the nature of the coalition opposed
to Gaddafi, which includes corrupt regime officials.
There is now talk about a "humanitarian intervention" in Libya,
similar to Yugoslavia and Iraq. A "no-fly zone" over Libya has been
mentioned, as has NATO military intervention. The aims behind such
statements are not humanitarian, but are intended to justify foreign
interference, which could potentially lead to an invasion. Should this
come to fruition, Libya would become an occupied country. Its
resources would be plundered and its assets privatized and controlled
by foreign corporations as in the case of Iraq.
Today, in Libya and the Arab World the ghosts of Omar Mukhtar and
Saladin are still very much alive and active. Getting rid of Gaddafi
and his sons alone is not the solution. The entire corrupt system of
governance in Libya and the culture of political corruption must be
dismantled. At the same time, however, foreign interference or
domination should also not be allowed to take root in Libya. If the
Libyan people are mobilized and steadfast, they can fight such
schemes.
Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya specializes in the Middle East and Central
Asia. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on
Globalization.
NOTES
[1] "UK Hague: some information that Qaddafi on way to Venezuela,"
Reuters, February 21, 2011.
[2] One is taken back by the proliferation of pre-1969 coup Libyan
flags. Where did all these flags come from?
[3] "3 Libyan Diplomats resign," The Hindu, February 22, 2011.
[4] James Wolf, "U.S. eyes arms sales to Libya," Reuters, March 6, 2009.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Information from sources in Libya; not publicly confirmed yet.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.; I have been given two explanations for this. The first
explanation is that government agents from Libya have been
disseminating misinformation to Al Jazeera. This includes reports made
to Al Jazeera that jets have been attacking civilians in the streets.
Gaddafi has used this to try to discredit Al Jazeera internally in
Libya by pointing out to the Libyan people that no jet attacks have
occurred and that Al Jazeera is broadcasting misinformation. The
second explanation is that Al Jazeera is simply spreading
misinformation. Whatever the case, both explanations agree no Libyan
jets have attacked protesters yet.
[10] Marine Hyde, "Beyoncé and the $2m gig for Colonel Gaddafi's son,"
The Guardian (U.K.), January 8, 2010; it was Mutassim and not Hannibal
Gaddafi that the music concert was for (the article is wrong). The
article is not authoritative and has been cited to illustrate that
these types of escapades are even vaguely known by the mainstream
press in Britain and Western Europe.
[11] U.S. State Department, "Remarks With Libyan National Security
Adviser Dr. Mutassim Qadhafi Before Their Meeting," April 21, 2009:
<http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/04/121993.htm>.
[12] Information from sources in Libya; not publicly confirmed yet.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] David Ljunggren, "Libya turmoil puts focus on Arctic oil:
Greenland," ed. Robert Wilson, Reuters, February 23, 2011.
[16] Information from sources in Libya; not publicly confirmed yet. I
have been told that Qaddafi promised the tribes reform and that he
would step down in about one year in time. I was also informed that he
claimed that none of his sons would control Libya either.
[17] Ibid.
[18] General (retired) Wesley Clark, "92 Street Y Exclusive Live
Interview," interview by Amy Goodman, Democracy Now, March 2, 2007.
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23375
------------------------------------
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/