Libya in Context - Moving beyond lies, propaganda, forlorn hopes and fantasy

I was not planning to revisit this topic, however I have had people asking me for a fuller analysis, so hopefully this is my final word.. at least for a while. It may seem long, but is actually only a brief overview as books can and will be written on this subject.

Putting things in context - If we want to understand any subject we need to put things in context or rather contexts. There follows my contextualisation of the turmoil in Libya:

The Historical Context
Historically, Libya was one of the first parts of Africa to turn from Black to Brown to White,thousands of years before the Christian era. Chancellor Williams, in his landmark book 'The Destruction of Black Civilisation', in discussing the period 2181-2040 B.C. tells us: "..Both ends of the empire broke away from the center. The northern end, white Lower Egypt, became independent again and more and more whites spread over Upper Egypt.........Since Lower Egypt also had internal strife among it's now independent provinces, delta chiefs did not hesitate in accepting the invitations of black princes to form alliances and lead troops into Upper Egypt. Asians also marched across the desert from Libya where they had also replaced the indigenous Blacks and were now the dominant population." (Williams 1987: 80)

In discussing the Libyan dynasties that ruled Kemet; Williams tell us that the Libyans "..were, first of all, Western Ethiopians, then heavily Berber, Mongolian, Arab, a sprinkling of Hebrews and other Asiatic peoples, and then of course, the resulting Afro-Asians." (Williams 1987: 112)

If we go back far enough "Libya was once so nearly all-black that to be called a Libyan meant that one was Black." (Williams 1987: 112)

The Libya referred to thus far is not the Libya of today, as what we now refer to as Eastern and Western Libya did not become politically united until 1911! Several hundred years before the Christian era the Carthaginians had taken control of Western Libya. During his invasion of North East Africa, in the fourth century BCE, Alexander of Macedonia conquered Eastern Libya and the Greeks ruled this region until they were superseded by the Romans. With the division of the Roman empire the Byzantine half (Eastern Roman empire) controlled eastern Libya. Various powers have controlled east and West Libya until the late 1500s, when the coastal regions of what is today Libya were conquered by the Turkish Ottoman empire. In 1910, Italian imperialism moved to colonize the area of Libya. Italy decided that they wanted to join in the imperialist fun (remember they had tried to conquer Ethiopia in the late 19th century) in the region. The British ruled Egypt. The French had colonized Algeria. From 1911 to 1943, Italy employed savage genocidal tactics to consolidate its rule in Libya. The historian Abdullatif Ahmida describes this as one of the most brutal colonizations of the 20th century. Libya itself became the country we know today in 1934 under the colonial rule of Mussolini.

Raymond Lotta in an article entitled 'The Events in Libya in Historical Perspective...Muammar Qaddafi in Class Perspective...The Question of Leadership in Communist Perspective' 09 March, 2011,Countercurrents.org tells us that:

"Italy was on the losing side of World War 2. After the war, the U.S. and Britain put their weight behind a pro-Western constitutional monarchy in Libya headed by King Idris. He allowed the U.S. to set up Wheelus Air Base. It was one of the U.S.'s largest overseas military facilities...and the base was used for military training, missile testing, and for fighter and reconnaissance missions.

it was only in 1959 that large oil deposits were discovered in Libya. U.S. and European companies moved in big time to set up production operations. The banking sector grew rapidly, especially after an oil pipeline to the Mediterranean Sea was finished. Oil revenues soared through the decade of the 1960s. But the foreign oil companies were getting the lion's share of earnings. And what oil wealth did return to Libya...it was concentrated in the hands of a small mercantile, banking, and speculator elite.

Poverty remained widespread. And the opportunities for a new middle class growing in connection with the oil economy...they were limited. So, mass resentment against the Idris monarchy was growing.

Then you had the impact of regional and world events. In 1967, Israel attacked Egypt and Syria with the support of the U.S. In Libya, students, intellectuals, and workers organized mass actions and strikes. There were also protests against the U.S. war in Vietnam. Unrest was spreading in the face of the Libyan government's total subordination to the West.

In the 1960s, a wave of national liberation struggles—in Asia, Latin America, and Africa—was battering imperialism and shook the international order. This aroused literally hundreds of millions throughout the world to rise in resistance. This was a time when a new nationalist spirit was being stirred, when ideas of Arab unity against imperialism were taking hold. It was a time when revolutionary China was influencing social forces and Marxism-Leninism was a big part of the ideological discourse. But the fact that the U.S. was under this kind of siege also provided openings for many different class forces who had been held down by imperialism. They saw new possibilities.

......Qaddafi was part of a group of young army officers influenced by the pan-Arabist and social reformist ideas of Gamal Nasser, the leader of Egypt. Qaddafi came from poor desert-tribal origins, and other radical-minded officers came from lower-class backgrounds. The military was one of the few institutions in Libyan society that afforded them any chance of training and mobility.

These young army officers were outraged by the corruption and subservience of the ruling regime. They saw themselves as the bearers of a new Libya. And in 1969, they organized a coup against the King and constituted a new government out of what they called their Revolutionary Command Council."

http://www.countercurrents.org/lotta090311.htm
Of course Muammar Gaddafi has ruled Libya since 1969 until the present day.

The key learning points to take from the above are:
- Present day Libya has existed for less than 80 years, which is a relatively short time in nation building terms.
- The division between East and West Libya has existed for thousands of years and was not created by Gaddafi
- Before Gaddafi took power the country was dominated by an elite drawn from eastern tribes/groups/clans and they have never forgiven him
- Blacks lost any meaningful stake in Libya thousands of years ago
- A significant minority of the population in the east are of Italian extraction

The Economic Context
As has been noted above, Libya has a lot of oil and we all know that 'the West', particularly the US, is competing with China for control of critical energy resources. As noted with Iraq, if Libya's main export was carrots people would be a lot less interested.

In an article entitled 'World Cheers as the CIA Plunges Libya Into Chaos' David Rothscum (March 01, 2011"Information Clearing House") David Rothscum tells us:

"Before the chaos erupted, Libya had a lower incarceration rate than the Czech republic. It ranked 61st. Libya had the lowest infant mortality rate of all of Africa. Libya had the highest life expectancy of all of Africa. Less than 5% of the population was undernourished. In response to the rising food prices around the world, the government of Libya abolished ALL taxes on food.

People in Libya were rich. Libya had the highest gross domestic product (GDP) at purchasing power parity (PPP) per capita of all of Africa. The government took care to ensure that everyone in the country shared in the wealth. Libya had the highest Human Development Index of any country on the continent. The wealth was distributed equally. In Libya, a lower percentage of people lived below the poverty line than in the Netherlands.

How does Libya get so rich? The answer is oil. The country has a lot of oil, and does not allow foreign corporations to steal the resources while the population starves, unlike countries like Nigeria, a country that is basically run by Shell."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27596.htm

Now, whilst the statement by Rothscum that "People in Libya were rich." is an exaggeration unless comparing Libya with the poorer countries in the world, however it is true that Libya is a country where there is not widespread poverty. The average life expectancy is 77.47 which ranks it 57th in the world http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/libya/libya_people.html and it scores well on many other developmental indices. Of course with a lot of oil and a population of around 6.5 million it is much easier to achieve these results as compared to Nigeria with a population of around 155 million people, however it is true to say that the Libyan government has not been as corrupt and financially self-serving as those in Nigeria or many of the oil rich Arab states.

Finally, have you ever pondered why in a time of austerity there is always money to kill people but often not enough to keep people alive? The following quote gives food for thought.

"The cost of bombing Libya. The U.S. operation in Libya could cost the U.S. between $400 million and $800 million, according to the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. ..................As Rep. Barbara Lee likes to say, “it's about priorities.” That is, when it comes to budget cuts, it's about what you think is vital and important and what you believe can fall by the waste side. University of Virginia Prof. Larry Sabato tweeted on the day the U.S. bombed Libya that “100 cruise missiles at $1 million dollars each = $110 million. Just baseline expense.”

Already estimates are coming in that the cost of the Libya operation could be over $1 billion dollars. The Cost of War in Afghanistan $377,025,390,632. Cost of War in Iraq $773,698,442,965. Total Cost of Wars Since 2001 $1,150,723,833,597. National Journal reports that the Pentagon is asking for $708.3 billion for this year, including another $159.3 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now let's think about those numbers and let's go over some of the proposed cuts in President Obama budget and the cuts the House GOP is proposing. Remember what you hear Speaker John “we're broke” Boehner says about his support of the Libya operation — if he does support it…

1 ••• President Obama is proposing to cut $2.5 billion in heating assistance for low-income people (LIHEAP).

2 ••• President Obama is proposing to cut $300 million from Community Development Block Grants, which the CBC is strongly opposed to.

3 ••• President Obama is proposing to cut $100 billion cut in CUTSl Grants over 10 years."

HOUSE GOP BUDGET CUS PROPOSALS
4 ••• The House GOP is proposing a $758 million cut in a program for the poor known as WIC. The Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants & Children and provides food assistance to low-income women and their infants.

5 ••• A $1.125 billion cut in state and local law enforcement and COPS hiring.

6 ••• The House GOP is proposing to cut $1.6 billion cut in job training and employment grants.

7 ••• The House GOP is proposing a $1.3 billion cut in community health centers.

8 ••• The House GOP is proposing a cut of $210 million from Maternal and Child Health Block Grants. This would chop the program by 30%. Like the WIC program, the grants assist low-income pregnant women and their children in accessing health care.

http://livinginblack.ning.com/forum/topics/the-real-cost-of-us-in-libya

The key learning points from the above are:
- The basic source of the internal discontent in Libya (which is real even if fanned by 'the West') is not economic.

- The oil wealth of Libya is a critical factor in the intervention of the 'Western powers'

- Libya's refusal to allow it's economy to be controlled by 'the West' put it on a collision course with 'the West'

- President Obama is a war criminal like his predecessors and serves the military industrial complex

- 'The West' is planning to use revenue from Libyan oil sales to pay for bombing the country!!!

The Political Context
In an article entitled 'With its military aggression against Libya, America stands as the champion of hypocrisy and war mongering' Solomon Comissiong tells us that:

" On March 20, 2011, several European powers, led by the United States, began bombing the North African nation of Libya under the pretext that it was a humanitarian mission to save civilians from being killed by “pro-Gaddafi” forces.

The bombing was authorized by the United Nations Security Council which continues to ignore the indiscriminate killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq, and tens of thousands of civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan, by the U.S.

If the American government is genuinely concerned about the killing of civilians, it would stop supporting the barbaric and repressive government of Israel for their crimes against humanity in Gaza, East Jerusalem and the West Bank. However, instead of standing on the side of justice, the U.S. government continues to fund the apartheid government of Israel by way of over three billion dollars each year, in military aid....................................

During Israel's 22-day assault on Gaza (December 27, 2008 - January 18, 2009), over 1400 Palestinians were killed, including 313 children. This unwarranted and disproportionate use of force, called Operation Cast Lead, was never stopped by the U.S. government. America was complicit with each and every destructive bomb and bullet indiscriminately hurled at civilians in Gaza. Where was the U.S.- imposed “no-fly zone' to prevent bombs, including white phosphorous bombs, from dropping directly on the homes of Palestinians? Where was the US's selective humanitarian conscience during this terror- laden campaign of death and destruction?

http://globalbreakingnews.com/news/3387/86/With-its-military-aggression-against-Libya-America-stands-as-the-champion-of-hypocrisy-and-war-mongering

Whilst I don't recommend watching too much television I always found that a phrase that was often used in 'Westerns' by 'Indian' characters "the White man speak with false tongue" always struck a chord with me! The foregoing quote by Comissiong reinforces our understanding that the military intervention by 'the West' has absolutely nothing to do with the protection of civilians or humanitarianism and everything to do with politics and economics. With the advance of the 'rebels' towards Gaddafi's home town of Surt, where it is fair to assume he still enjoys considerable support, it will be interesting to see if the 'alliance' forces will be even handed in their approach to protecting civilians and will stop the rebels from firing on the town. Of course we know the answer, only some civilians are worthy of support and protection.

Watch the following video filmed in 2007 to see the former US four star General; Wesley Clarke, describing how he was told by a General on the Joint Chiefs of staff of the US's plan to take down seven governments in five years starting with Iraq. These governments were: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.

http://livinginblack.ning.com/video/libyan-invasion-planned-10

The Key learning points from the above are:
- The 'western powers' are motivated by their desire for continued political and economic hegemony over North Africa and the rest of the Arab world

- Humanitarian intervention is a cover for 'regime change' which is the real objective of the bombing, despite the lies of President Obama

- Libya is one of only five countries in Afrika that are not part of Africom

- 'The West' has long-term plans for regime change across the globe which we are usually not aware of until after the event.

The Cultural Context
Why is the AU (African Union) such a bit part player in this imperialist drama? Those who support the 'dream' (what I would call a nightmare) of Continentalist pan-Afrikanism

would have us believe it is because the wise leaders of Africa do not support military intervention (which most don't), however the truth which so many find unpalatable is that in terms of civilisation identity Libya is no more Afrikan than Iraq or Yemen or Syria. What is civilisation identity? Samuel P Huntington suggests that:

“CIVILIZATION IDENTITY will be increasingly important in the future, and the world will be shaped in large measure by the interactions among seven or eight major civilizations. These include Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American and possibly African civilization. The most important conflicts of the future will occur along the cultural fault lines separating these civilizations from one another.”

THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS By Samuel P. Huntington, Foreign Affairs, Summer 1993, pg. 25 (my emphasis in bold)

Huntington suggests that “Civilisation and culture both refer to the overall way of life of a people, and a civilisation is a culture writ large. They both involve the “values, norms, institutions, and modes of thinking to which successive generations in a given society have attached primary importance.”(page 41)

There is no civilisation identity which unites Continental Africa and the AU in the way Western civilisation unites the EU.

You never question why Australia, Canada and the United States act in consort with Western Europe do you? They act together because they share a civilisation identity. Geography has nothing to do with it. if it was about geography, why isn't Australia politically aligned with Asian countries? Ask yourself why are you receiving this newsletter? Is it becaue you live in the same country as me (many of you do not)? Why don't the people on my street receive it? Libya is in Africa but is part of the Arab League like many countries in North Afrika (some of whom have majority Afrikan populations). Why? Why is Egypt referred to as in the Middle East when it is in Afrika? Why are the Arab Libyans rebels killing Afrikans who live in Libya as part of this rebellion?

To hammer home the message about civilisation identity; consider the following. In the war in Bosnia following the break up of Yugoslavia there were three parties:

The Serbs - who were primarily supported by Russia
The Croats - who were primarily supported by Germany

The Bosnian Muslims - who were primarily supported by Saudi Arabia and Iran; as well as Muslim fighters from all over the world. N.B. The US provided some political support but did not commit any military support.

This was a war in Europe. Ask yourself why countries aligned themselves the way they did. Why did you have Sudanese nationals fighting for the Bosnian Muslims but you would never have found them fighting against the apartheid regime in South Africa? The answer is civilisation identity.

For those who think Gaddafi's only agenda is Pan-Afrikanism let's hear the Nigerian scholar Dr Chinweizu quoting Muammar Gaddafi:

In the past 40 years, Libya's Gadhafi has been particularly active in sponsoring chaos, anarchy and civil wars in Chad, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire etc., and in trying to Islamise Uganda, Rwanda, the CAR etc. For example, in a live broadcast on Rwanda Radio on 17 May 1985, Gadhafi said:

"First you must stick to your Islamic religion and insist that your children are taught the Islamic religion and you teach the Arabic language because without the Arabic language we could not understand Islam. . . You must teach that Islam is the religion of Africa. . . You must raise your voice high and declare that Allah is great because Africa must be Muslim. . . We must wage a holy war so that Islam may spread in Africa."

--quoted in [Bankie, F. and Mchombu, K. eds (2006) Pan Africanism, Windhoek: Gamsberg Macmillan, pp. 239-240]

Just what Afrika needs a religious war! Turn all of Afrika south of the Sahara (that is not alreadty Islamic) into the central region of Nigeria!

You can read the full article on my website at the following link:

http://www.houseofknowledge.org.uk/new/doc/6_South_Sudan_and_the_problem_of_Arab_racism_in_Black_Africa.pdf

Chinweizu also cites Gaddafi's call for Arabs who live outside of Afrika to move into Afrika in an article entitled 'The Arab quest for Lebensraum in Africa and the challenge to Pan

Afrikanism' Copyright © 2006 by Chinweizu which can also be found on my website in Chinweizu Corner

“The third of the Arab community living outside Africa should move in with the two-thirds on the continent and join the African Union 'which is the only space we have'”

--Col. Mouammar Gadhafi of Libya, at the Arab League, 2001

If you go to Chinweizu corner and Neo-Garveyism on my website you can read lots of articles about the reality of Afrikan/Arab relations.

The Key learning points from the above are:
- Understanding civilisation identity is critical to understanding the place of Libya and other majority Arab North Afrikan countries in world politics

- Most Afrikan countries are irrelevant in this whole scenario. Libya might as well be on a continent on the other side of the world

- Gaddafi has espoused Pan-Africanism, Pan-Arabism and Pan-Islamism at various times according to his needs. He has supported the governments of other Afrikan countries

as well as rebel movements in other Afrikan countries when it has suited him.

- Afrikans have to move from dichotomous thinking which says 'my enemy's enemy is my friend' to the understanding that in politics 'There is no such thing as permanent friendships, only permanent interests'.

Conclusion
Global politics is complex and makes for strange bedfellows. The Saud dynasty who rule Saudia Arabia and practice Wahabbi Islam, an extremely rigid strand of Sunni Islam, align themselves with the US and 'the West' to organise against their key regional enemy, Iran (majority Shi'ite) and also are happy to see Gaddafi attacked in Sunni Libya because of his politics. Meanwhile Saudi Arabia produces significant number of jihadists who wage war on the West.

It's easy to jump to simplistic conclusions. The West is bad therefore Gaddafi is good. The West is wrong therefore Gaddafi is right. The West is our enemy therefore Gaddafi is our true friend. The West supports the rebellion therefore it is purely manufactured. There is genuine dissent against the Libyan government. I couldn't tell you how many Libyans feel this way, however we know it has long historic roots and is rooted in divisions that pre-date Gaddafi. As usual 'The West' sees an opportunity for divide and rule and takes it. The hopefully dwindling number of Obamaholics are going to end up with so much metaphorical blood on their hands if they keep on supporting their war criminal hero there won't be enough soap available to wash away their moral complicity. And what to do if he turns US guns on a majority Afrikan country? Is it a case of my Black President right or wrong? Meanwhile around a million Afrikans have been displaced by the civil war in Cote D'Ivoire and France is working behind the scenes there; whilst working up front in Libya. Speaking of covert action, Britian has at least 350 special operatives on the ground in Libya as I type.

The West's military intervention in Libya is cold, calculating, vicious, hypocritical, wrong and typically European.

At the end of the day I am Afrikan, I am on the Afrikan team and learned long ago that whilst we cry for everyone; everywhere, virtually no one else cries for us. There is no Justice, JUST US!