Over the last days of war against Libya and even before, the corporate media have been trying to convince the people from this Arab nation and the world of the need to overthrow the regime of Muammar al-Gaddafi. Taking advantage of the massive riots that in Tunisia and Egypt ousted autocratic dictatorships which had the blessing of the United States and other European powers, the transnational media and the powers they bow down took the opportunity to present what started in Libya as a few hordes of people calling for civil war as a popular uprising with the support of the West.
Instead of large-scale demonstrations fueled by democratic demands, news outlets reported about heavily armed minorities who had the support of members of the opposition in the exile and their allies in the country, and heads of State in Washington and Europe, who after a fragile alliance with Gaddafi, decided to give him a piece of their mind. The idea of a change of government had existed since well before the demonstration against the executive in Bengazi. Gaddafi was just an excuse; this attack had been planned by the Pentagon a long time ago.
The United States and its European allies have justified NATO’s air raids saying that they are a just reaction to the repression of the demonstrators by Gadaffi forces in Bengazi. The number of victims in these actions, which were nothing but the response of government troops to an attempt to destabilize the government from abroad, was blown out of proportion by the media.
What was presented at first as humanitarian aid which would be limited to an air bridge aimed at "protecting civilians from Gaddafi’s bombings," became, from the very first day of its implementation, indiscriminate attacks not only against government military targets but also against civilian infrastructure: residential areas, hospitals, television stations, warehouses. NATO bombings have sown death and terror among the population that they were supposed to be protecting. The lie has been exposed.
Over the last seven days, media corporations have been spreading the news that Tripoli has been taken by the rebels when the truth is that the resistance still controls some areas in that city, and even in other cities like Sirte and Sabah. But their objective is to convince the Libyan people that his leader has been defeated, so that they join the insurgent forces.
Were Gaddafi to be overthrown, it would not be at the hands of the people eager for democracy, but by pressures from NATO and the main masterminds of the war (the United States, the United Kingdom and France), who have used the armed members of the opposition (some Islamic extremists) as their forces on the ground while they do the rest of the work from the air, with their air raids. The leaders of the war in Libya are not the members of the Libyan opposition, as the media want to make the public believe, but rather NATO and other advisors sent from abroad.
The death or resignation of Gaddafi will not bring peace to the Libyan people.
It would be naÃ¯ve to think that a group of poorly organized militia, who needed the support of NATO and military advice from British, US and French Special Forces, as British Minister of Defense Liam Fox has acknowledged, will be able to build a democratic and stable Libya. They wonÂ´t be able to enjoy their victory: on the one hand, it is still to be seen for how long the resistance will endure, and ultimately, the armed opposition will continue to rely, as they have so far, on foreign support, even if "peace" is accomplished. This week NATO was already studying what role it should play following the overthrow of the Gaddafi government and the establishment of a temporary executive body, as announced by the CNT.
The history of intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan would be repeating itself. The powers behind these actions know that it is not easy to topple a government and replace it. The battle for power, even more in a country where the Taliban are so strong, will certainly continue.
NATO could be invading Libya long before the process of transition envisioned by the superpowers is enacted, in which the role the military bloc could play is still under consideration. The deployment of NATO’s occupation army is a hidden card of the war strategists which they will probably play if the pro-Gaddafi forces counterattack.
The Promised Bounty
Although social sectors took part in the first protests with legitimate demands on the Libyan Executive, that is not the essence of the unstable situation promoted and turned into a civil war by world powers. The CNT, the leadership of the armed rebels, is clearly subservient to the powerful nations sponsoring this war. Although the conflict is far from an end, the CNT has promised its masters substantial oil contracts. This political alliance will have dreadful consequences for Africa and beyond.
CNT spokesman Ali Zeidan, the man who said that some 6,000 people had died in the attacks launched by Gaddafi, said recently that the contracts signed with foreign companies will be respected, and noted that the future executive will not forget the aid provided by these countries.
This is a reassuring guarantee for Washington and its closest allies in this war (France, the United Kingdom and Italy). Although many western companies had shown interest in taking part in the exploitation of Libyan oil following the 2003 uprising, the first sanctions imposed on that nation did not make it easy. Gaddafi wanted to raise the state benefit quota and had announced the opening of this sector to Chinese, Russian and Indian companies.
In the race for Libya’s high quality crude oil, which in addition is easy to extract, it is Eni, an Italian company and Total, from France, who will receive the greatest benefits. Eni directors take pride in having been the first to meet with the CNT and they have assured that they are in touch on a regular basis.
Furthermore, the French Ministry of Economy and Finances sent envoys to Bengazi, the headquarters of CNT, including representatives from Total and other large French companies, such as Alcatel-Lucent, Thales, Entrepose, EADS, Sanofi, Veolia, GDF Suez, Sidem and Denos, with a view to securing potential business deals.
Gaddafi’s defeat and the establishment of a CNT government would also allow for the creation of a US Military Command for Africa (AFRICOM) in the region. So far, the United States has been using the Stuttgart Military Headquarters in Germany as its base of operations. The Libyan leader has always been an obstacle in Washington’s plans to control the natural resources of the African continent and hindering China from expanding its interest in the region. Gaddafi always condemned the Pentagon’s intentions to colonize Africa.
In addition, the attack against Libya is also a hard blow to Africa’s advance towards financial independence, a path Gaddafi wanted to open through the creation of bank and financial institutions funded by Libya with a view to boosting the development of the continent, without the excessive interest rates imposed by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
The creation in 2011 of the African Monetary Fund (AMF) based in Yaounde, Camerun, would completely displace the IMF in Africa. Also, the creation of the African Central Bank in Abuja, Nigeria, sought to weaken the CFA, the currency that over the last 50 years was used as an instrument to control many countries in the area which had become independent from France.
Unfortunately, it will be very hard to implement these plans now that the 30 billion dollars Libya had destined to fund these programs, which were kept at the Central Bank of this Arab nation, have been frozen by the US government.
Determined not to lose ground, Western nations thought of taking part in the AMF, a request that was unanimously rejected by African nations in December 2010. Now, in addition to European and US companies, the IMF wants its part of the war bounty. This institution recently announced its disposition to finance the reconstruction of Libya, a country destroyed by the same countries financing this organization.
The worst in this complex scenario is that the formulas implemented by the West in Libya could be also the designs these world powers have planned for Syria, a Middle Eastern country whose political independence, sovereignty, links with Iran and opposition to the Zionist government of Israel the Pentagon has never approved of.
The Syrian president is being vilified by the media, as they did with Gaddafi. He is being portrayed as a coldblooded repressor of peaceful demonstrations, when there is proof that such demonstrations had been infiltrated by armed groups secretly funded from abroad. Syria has been condemned by the UN Human Rights Council, and Washington and its European allies are planning to do the same at the UN Security Council.
And although they say that Syria will not be attacked, these plans are unquestionably on the Pentagon’s table.