By Col. Mu’ummar Qaddafi;

Translated by Professor Sam Hamod, Ph.D.

.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27856.htm
.

In the name of Allah, the beneficent, the merciful..

For 40 years, or was it longer, I can’t remember, I did all I could to give people houses, hospitals, schools, and when they were hungry, I gave them food, I even made Benghazi into farmland from the desert, I stood up to attacks from that cowboy Reagan, when he killed my adopted orphaned daughter, he was trying to kill me, instead he killed that poor innocent child, then I helped my brothers and sisters from Africa with money for the African Union, did all I could to help people understand the concept of real democracy, where people’s committees ran our country, but that was never enough, as some told me, even people who had 10 room homes, new suits and furniture, were never satisfied, as selfish as they were they wanted more, and they told Americans and other visitors, they needed “democracy,” and “freedom,” never realizing it was a cut throat system, where the biggest dog eats the rest, but they were enchanted with those words, never realizing that in America, there was no free medicine, no free hospitals, no free housing, no free education and no free food, except when people had to beg or go to long lines to get soup, no, no matter what I did, it was never enough for some, but for others, they knew I was the son of Gamal Abdel Nasser, the only true Arab and Muslim leader we’ve had since Salah’ a’ Deen, when he claimed the Suez Canal for his people, as I claimed Libya, for my people, it was his footsteps I tried to follow, to keep my people free from colonial domination—from thieves who would steal from us—

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, in the Libyan Jammohouriyah,

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.

Let this testament be my voice to the world, that I stood up to crusader attacks of NATO, stood up to cruelty, stood up to betrayal, stood up the West and its colonialist ambitions, and that I stood with my African brothers, my true Arab and Muslim brothers, as a beacon of light, when others were building castles, I lived in a modest house, and in a tent, I never forgot my youth in Sirte, I did not spend our national treasury foolishly, and like Salah’a'deen, our great Muslim leader, who rescued Jerusalem for Islam, I took little for myself…

In the West, some have called me “mad,” “crazy,” but they know the truth but continue to lie, they know that our land is independent and free, not in the colonial grip, that my vision, my path, is, and has been clear and for my people and that I will fight to my last breath to keep us free, may Allah almighty help us to remain faithful and free.

Yousef Munayyer
http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/display/ContentDetails/i/26797/pid/2254

.

Palestine Center Brief No. 208

When diplomatic sources revealed that the United States was abandoning efforts for an Israeli settlement freeze, many surely did not know whether to laugh or cry. The first two years of U.S.-Israeli relations under the Obama administration has been a debacle. For the next two, what is learned from that failure, and how it’s applied, will be of utmost importance.

The failure to get a freeze is not only about the settlements — a colonial enterprise expanding on occupied Palestinian territory that a new Human Rights Watch report called a “two-tier system” that is both “separate and unequal”— but also a test of America’s commitment to evenhanded mediation. So-called core issues, including the return of Palestinian refugees and the disposition of Jerusalem, are every bit as difficult as the settlements, maybe more. But obtaining the freeze was a tone-setter, one that would have shown that the U.S. could fairly enforce obligations by both parties.

This didn’t happen. Instead, during the earlier, temporary 10-month freeze, the Israeli settlements were still being expanded — only new-home construction was frozen — and settlements around Jerusalem were accelerated. When the Oslo peace process began — a process that was based on the principle of a two-state solution — there were 200,000 settlers in occupied Palestinian territory. Over the years, as Israel has claimed it sought peace, it increased the number of colonists to well over 500,000 today, according to the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics.

No legitimate Palestinian leader can negotiate with Israel while it continues to colonize Palestinian land.

The U.S. strategy began to fail when it expected the Israelis to freeze settlements upon request. What the Obama administration apparently didn’t realize was that Israel would not change its behavior without an incentive. When that finally became clear, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton made an offer that amounted to a bribe.

Generally, the incentive to rectify bad behavior in the international community — behavior like expanding settlements despite road map obligations and international law — is delivered by sticks, not carrots. But the deal offered to Israel, which included billions of dollars’ worth of advanced F-35s in exchange for a 90-day freeze, was all carrot and no stick.

And it didn’t work. Despite American prostrations, the Israelis continued with settlement expansion, and provocative announcements about settlements around Jerusalem were made just as the offer was reported. All hope for a freeze disintegrated.

The message this sent to Palestinians was that the United States was simply incapable of being an evenhanded broker. The U.S. never misses an opportunity to reward bad Israeli behavior, and Israel never misses an opportunity to squeeze its principal world ally.

Ultimately, we discovered that Israel’s near-insatiable desire for American carrots is outweighed only by its insatiable desire to colonize Palestinian land. Will Washington learn from this and apply the lessons in the next stage of mediating this conflict?

The Obama administration should not expect the Israelis to do anything without pressure, and this pressure — economic, diplomatic — has to be real, tangible and biting. A brazen Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, undoubtedly emboldened by what he and his right-wing coalition view as a victory in a standoff with President Obama, needs to be presented with a decisive and harsh response to Israel’s bad behavior.

Some suggest that abandoning a freeze gives the United States an opportunity to put forward its own plan. But if Washington couldn’t muster the strength or the will to press Netanyahu on settlements, can anyone believe it can press the Israelis to accept a deal on the rest of the core issues? It’s highly unlikely.

The biggest mistake the United States has made in the last two years was not its focus on settlements but its failure to use leverage to get the Israelis to stop building them.

Has Washington learned the lesson? Perhaps the answer came earlier this month when Clinton delivered a major policy speech at the Brookings Institution. Though she expressed her frustration with the peace process, she didn’t signal any change in the U.S. approach. Clinton’s message can be summed up succinctly: We will keep doing what we have done and hope for a better outcome.

At a moment when the world needed to hear a change in direction, we instead were told that the United States is committed to repeating the same failed policies of the past. This is precisely why Argentina, Bolivia and Brazil recently determined they wouldn’t wait for the bankrupt American-led process and recognized the state of Palestine.

America’s political response? Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Valley Village) rushed a resolution to the House floor expressing opposition to such declarations of Palestinian statehood. The resolution, which passed, is a timely reminder of the increasing gap between Washington and the international community on this issue.

If there is no change in the U.S. approach to Israeli violations, no one will take this administration seriously: not the Israelis, certainly not the Palestinians, and presumably not the international community. Who can blame them?

Yousef Munayyer is Executive Director of the Palestine Center. This policy brief may be used without permission but with proper attribution to the Center.

This article was originally published in the Los Angeles Times.

By Donna Cassata,

Associated Press

.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Stretched thin by two wars, the U.S. military is  spending upward of $1 billion in an international assault to destroy  Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi’s air defenses and save rebels from likely defeat, according to analysts and a rough calculation of the military operation so far. Missiles fired from submarines in the Mediterranean, bombs dropped by  B-2 stealth bombers and an array of warplanes launching airstrikes over the northern portion of Libya easily total hundreds of millions of dollars. The campaign entered its fifth day on Wednesday.

The Obama administration isn’t talking overall cost, but the magnitude of the military campaign, the warships and aircraft deployed and the munitions used provide some information to estimate the growing price tag. As of Tuesday, the coalition had fired at least 162 sea-launched  Tomahawk missiles priced at $1 million to $1.5 million apiece and  dispatched B-2 stealth bombers — round-trip from Missouri — to drop  2,000-pound bombs on Libyan sites. Total flying time: 25 hours.  Operating cost for one hour: at least $10,000.

Yet those numbers only provide part of the costs. The B-2 bombers  require expensive fuel — and rely on air tankers to refuel in flight — and probably needed parts replaced upon their return to Whiteman Air Force Base. The pilots most certainly will get combat pay. A contingent of U.S. warplanes; 11 ships steaming in the Mediterranean, including three submarines, two destroyers and two amphibious ships; and one F-15 fighter jet that crashed, costing $75 million or more — it all adds up to numbers that unnerve budget-conscious lawmakers.

“Every six hours we have another billion-dollar deficit,” said Rep.  Roscoe Bartlett, R-Md., a member of the House Armed Services Committee.  ”This could cost us a billion dollars there, which means simply another billion-dollar debt that our kids, our grandkids and our great-grandkids are going to have to pay back.”

Yet some Democrats argue it could have been far more costly. ”This financial obligation would have been much more significant it if were unilateral,” Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said Wednesday in a conference call with reporters.  ”Multilateral would not eliminate it, but it minimizes it.” Said the panel’s chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.: “We’re going to be the junior partner in a multilateral effort.” He suggested other countries would cover some of the cost of equipment or fuel. Zack  Cooper, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary  Assessments, said Wednesday that the initial cost of the operation was between $400 million and $800 million and the weekly expense was likely $30 million to $100 million.

Cooper said missiles and bombs represent the significant first-time cost. As the campaign progresses, fuel will be a major expense. ”The real question looking ahead is what the length of the operation is going to be and who is going to bear the burden of maintaining the no-fly zone,” he said. President Barack Obama has insisted that the United States will turn  control of the operation over to other countries within days. Defense Secretary Robert Gates suggested it could be as early as Saturday. The Pentagon is expected to cover the cost of the no-fly zone in its  current budget. In a classified briefing for congressional staff  Tuesday, officials from the State Department, Pentagon and Treasury were pressed on the cost. They declined to address the issue.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, said he would offer an amendment to the next budget resolution that would prohibit taxpayer dollars from being used to fund U.S. military operations in Libya. His effort could gain significant congressional support, including the backing of tea partiers, if the U.S. military operation is going full-bore when lawmakers return from their recess next week. ”We have already spent trillions of dollars on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, both of which descended into unwinnable quagmires,” Kucinich wrote his colleagues. “Now, the president is plunging the United States into yet another war we cannot afford.”

The government already is operating on a series of stopgap spending bills for the current fiscal year amid the clamor to cut the budget, including defense dollars. The Pentagon has requested $553 billion for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, plus $118 billion in war costs for Iraq and Afghanistan. ”The Pentagon really needs to do this on the cheap,” said Loren  Thompson, head of the Virginia-based Lexington Institute and adviser to several major defense contractors. “If someone suggests more money to do the Libyan operation, most voters would say, ‘Let’s not do the Libyan operation.’”

In the past, the United States has footed the bill for some costly no-fly zones. In the 1990s, the U.S. participated in Operation Noble Anvil, an air  assault in Yugoslavia. Enforcement of the no-fly zone lasted from March 1999 to June 1999, and cost $1.8 billion. After the first Persian Gulf War, two no-fly zones in Iraq to protect citizens from Saddam Hussein’s wrath cost about $700 million a year — from 1992 to 2003.

Rep. Howard Berman of California, top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he expected lawmakers to make a spending cut exception for national security. “Do we sit out the whole transition in Egypt or are there roles we can play?” Berman said. “Even the most rabid budget-cutters have as a general proposition accepted the notion that national security matters are treated differently than other matters.”

The Congressional Research Service said the costs of establishing and maintaining a no-fly zone can vary widely based on several factors, including the duration of the military operation, the specific military actions, the size and terrain of the targeted country, and whether “mission creep” occurs. The latter is an expansion of military steps toward the same goal.

— Coeur d’Alene Press, March 24, 2011, p. 1

John Walsh: Impeach Barack Obama

by John V. Walsh
http://original.antiwar.com/john-v-walsh/2011/03/23/impeach-barack-obama/

.

The time has come for those who claim high regard for the U.S. Constitution to show that they mean what they say. The time has come to begin impeachment proceedings against President Barack H. Obama for high crimes and misdemeanors. The United States has initiated a war against Libya, as Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has conceded. When one country bombs another, which has not attacked it nor posed any immediate threat to it, that is an act of war. No “humanitarian” rationale justifies such an act. Only an act of Congress suffices according to the United States Constitution. Barack Obama has violated that provision of the United States Constitution, which he swore, falsely it is now apparent, to defend and protect. Barack Obama has committed this greatest of impeachable offenses. Other offenses related to torture and violation of the civil liberties of U. S. citizens may emerge as articles of impeachment are drawn up.

Many Tea Party candidates and paleo-conservative and libertarian Republicans, such as Rep. Ron Paul, won office by declaring their high regard for the Constitution. Rep. Paul stated in advance of the attack on Libya that a Congressional declaration of war was necessary according to the provisions of the Constitution before an assault could proceed. If these Republicans do not act now to begin impeachment following the lead of the very principled Dr. Paul, their words meant nothing, and they should be turned out of office.

Similarly antiwar liberals such as Dennis Kucinich backed candidate Barack Obama because of his promises of peace. But President Obama has given us ever more war. His pledge to end the war in Iraq by 2009 turns out to be an empty promise, and he has widened the war in Afghanistan. He has also ordered the bombing of Pakistan, another act of war not authorized by Congress. If such liberals are genuine agents of peace, they too have an obligation to follow the lead of Kucinich who has used the term impeachment with respect to Barack Obama’s behavior to initiate impeachment proceedings. Otherwise they are poseurs, and they should be turned out of office.

Barack Obama can himself be called as the first witness to the hearings on his impeachment, so obvious is his crime. In 2008 as a candidate for the presidency he replied as follows to a question from the Boston Globe’s Charlie Savage.

Savage:” In what circumstances, if any, would the president have constitutional authority to bomb Iran without seeking a use-of-force authorization from Congress? (Specifically, what about the strategic bombing of suspected nuclear sites — a situation that does not involve stopping an IMMINENT threat?)

Obama: “The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation.”

High members of his administration agree and might provide ancillary testimony. Vice President Joseph Biden has declared: “The Constitution is clear: except in response to an attack or the imminent threat of attack, only Congress may authorize war and the use of force.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was of the same opinion: “If the country is under truly imminent threat of attack, of course the President must take appropriate action to defend us. At the same time, the Constitution requires Congress to authorize war. I do not believe that the President can take military action – including any kind of strategic bombing – against Iran without congressional authorization.”

Barack Obama has further isolated the U.S. in the world by going to war against Libya, contrary to his claims of being a part of a broad international effort. This can only do more damage to our country, bleeding now with so many problems. Consider the vote in UN Security Council. Michael Lind informs us of the demographics and power relationships lying behind the UN vote as follows: “In the vote to authorize war against Libya, the U.S., Britain and France joined by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Gabon, Lebanon, Nigeria, Portugal and South Africa. Abstaining from the vote were five countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China and Germany.”

“What do the five countries that registered their opposition to the Libyan war have in common? They make up most of the great powers of the early twenty-first century. A few years back, Goldman Sachs identified the so-called “BRIC’s” — Brazil, Russia, India and China — as the most important emerging countries in the world. The opponents of the Libyan war on the Security Council are the BRIC’s plus Germany, the most populous and richest country in Europe.”

“Including the United States, the Security Council nations that voted for the no-fly zone resolution have a combined population of a little more than 700 million people and a combined GDP, in terms of purchasing power parity, of roughly $20 trillion. The Security Council countries that showed their disapproval of the Libyan war by abstaining from the vote have a combined population of about 3 billion people and a GDP of around $21 trillion.”

“If the U.S. is factored out, the disproportion between the pro-war and anti-war camps on the Security Council is even more striking. The countries that abstained from the vote account for more than 40 percent of the human race. The countries that joined the U.S. in voting to authorize attacks on Libya, including Britain and France, have a combined population that adds up to a little more than 5 percent of the human race.”

The situation appears worse the more one regards it. Lebanon’s government controls only part of its territory. Gabon is a statelet with a mere 1.6 million people, smaller than many American cities. And the UN ambassadors of two of the countries who sided with the U.S., Nigeria and South Africa, were not present when the vote was scheduled to be taken. Ambassador Rice had to leave the Security Council chamber, find them and usher them in herself.

Partisan considerations should not impede the move to impeach Barack Obama. When George W. Bush was president, many on the Democratic Party Left called for his impeachment. They must do the same for President Obama who has more clearly violated the Constitution than President Bush since he did not even seek the dubious Congressional “authorization” which George W. Bush asked for and received. If the Left cannot do this, its credibility will be in shambles, and quite deservedly so. On the other side clearly there is reason to indict Bush, and some on the Left are calling for that as are certain authorities in European countries where the former President dare not go. But at the moment Barack Obama is in charge and capable of greater damage if he is not stopped by impeachment. Impeachment of Barack Obama can no longer be avoided.

President Barack Obama has violated the U.S. Constitution and employed the armed forces of the U.S. as a king’s army. The U.S. made its revolution to escape such a predicament, and if this usurper of Congressional authority is not stopped and punished, these crimes will continue under each succeeding executive. This must end and it must end now. Impeachment proceedings must begin at once.

Redrawing the Map of Africa

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research

www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23605
.

Part II

Click to consult Part I Insurrection and Military Intervention: The US NATO Attempted Coup d’Etat in Libya?
The geopolitical and economic implications of a US-NATO led military intervention directed against Libya are far-reaching.

Libya is among the World’s largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of global oil reserves, more than twice those of the US.

“Operation Libya” is part of  the broader military agenda in the Middle East and Central Asia which consists in gaining control and corporate ownership over more than sixty percent of the world’s reserves of oil and natural gas, including oil and gas pipeline routes.

“Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Nigeria, Algeria, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, possess between 66.2 and 75.9 percent of total oil reserves, depending on the source and methodology of the estimate.” (See Michel Chossudovsky, The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, January 4, 2007) .

With 46.5 billion barrels of proven reserves, (10 times those of Egypt), Libya is the largest oil economy in the African continent followed by Nigeria and Algeria (Oil and Gas Journal). In contrast, US proven oil reserves are of the order of 20.6 billion barrels (December 2008) according to the Energy Information Administration.  U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas, and Natural Gas Liquids Reserves)

The most recent estimates place Libya’s oil reserves at 60 billion barrels. Its gas reserves at 1,500 billion m3. Its production has been between 1.3 and 1.7 million barrels a day, well below its productive capacity. Its longer term objective is three million b/d and a gas production of 2,600 million cubic feet a day, according to figures of the National Oil Corporation (NOC).

The (alternative) BP Statistical Energy Survey (2008) places Libya’s proven oil reserves at 41.464 billion barrels at the end of 2007 which represents 3.34 % of the world’s proven reserves. (Mbendi Oil and Gas in Libya – Overview).

Oil is the “Trophy” of US-NATO led Wars

An invasion of Libya under a humanitarian mandate would serve the same corporate interests as the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq. The underlying objective is to take possession of Libya’s oil reserves, destabilize the National Oil Corporation (NOC) and eventually privatize the country’s oil industry, namely transfer the control and ownership of Libya’s oil wealth into foreign hands.

The National Oil Corporation (NOC) is ranked 25 among the world’s Top 100 Oil Companies. (The Energy Intelligence ranks NOC 25 among the world’s Top 100 companies. – Libyaonline.com)

The planned invasion of Libya, which is already underway is part of the broader “Battle for Oil”.  Close to 80 percent of Libya’s oil reserves are located in the Sirte Gulf basin of Eastern Libya. (See map below)

Libya is a Prize Economy. “War is good for business”. Oil is the trophy of US-NATO led wars.

Wall Street, the Anglo-American oil giants, the US-EU weapons producers would be the unspoken beneficiaries of a US-NATO led military campaign directed against Libya.

Libyan oil is a bonanza for the Anglo-American oil giants. While the market value of crude oil is currently well in excess of 100 dollars a barrel, the cost of Libyan oil is extremely low, as low as $1.00 a barrel (according to one estimate). As one oil market expert commented somewhat cryptically:

“At $110 on the world market, the simple math gives Libya a $109 profit margin.” (Libya Oil, Libya Oil One Country’s $109 Profit on $110 Oil, EnergyandCapital.com March 12, 2008)

Foreign Oil Interests in Libya

Foreign oil companies operating prior to the insurrection in Libya include France’s Total, Italy’s ENI, The China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), British Petroleum, the Spanish Oil consortium REPSOL, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Occidental Petroleum, Hess, Conoco Phillips.

Of significance, China plays a central role in the Libyan oil industry. The China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) had a workforce of some 400 employees. The total Chinese workforce in Libya was of the order of 30,000.

Eleven percent (11%) of Libyan oil exports are channelled to China. While there are no figures on the size and importance of CNPC’s production and exploration activities, there are indications that they are sizeable.

More generally, China’s presence in North Africa is considered by Washington to constitute an intrusion. From a geopolitical standpoint, China is an encroachment. The military campaign directed against Libya is intent upon excluding China from North Africa.

Also of importance is the role of Italy. ENI, the Italian oil consortium puts out 244,000 barrels of gas and oil, which represents almost 25 percent of Libya’s total exports. ( Sky News: Foreign oil firms halt Libyan operations, February 23, 2011).

Among US companies in Libya, Chevron and Occidental Petroleum (Oxy) decided barely 6 months ago (October 2010) not to renew their oil and gas exploration licenses in Libya. (Why are Chevron and Oxy leaving Libya?: Voice of Russia, October 6, 2010). In contrast, in November 2010, Germany’s oil company, R.W. DIA E signed a far-reaching agreement with Libya’s National Oil Corporation (NOC) involving exploration and production sharing. AfricaNews – Libya: German oil firm signs prospecting deal – The AfricaNews,

The financial stakes as well  as “the spoils of war” are extremely high. The military operation is intent upon dismantling Libya’s financial institutions as well as confiscating billions of dollars of Libyan financial assets deposited in Western banks.

It should be emphasised that Libya’s military capabilities, including its air defense system are weak.

Libya Oil Concessions

Redrawing the Map of Africa

Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa. The objective of US-NATO interference is strategic: it consists in outright theft, in stealing the nation’s oil wealth under the disguise of a humanitarian intervention.

This military operation is intent upon establishing US hegemony in North Africa, a region historically dominated by France and to lesser extent by Italy and Spain.

With regard to Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, Washington’s design is to weaken the political links of these countries to France and push for the installation of new political regimes which have a close rapport with the US. This weakening of France is part of a US imperial design. It is a historical process which goes back to the wars in Indochina.

US-NATO intervention leading to the eventual formation of a US puppet regime is also intent upon excluding China from the region and edging out China’s National Petroleum Corp (CNPC). The Anglo-American oil giants including British Petroleum which signed an exploration contract in 2007 with the Ghadaffi government are among the potential “beneficiaries” of  the proposed US-NATO military operation.

More generally, what is at stake is the redrawing of the map of Africa, a process of neo-colonial redivision, the scrapping of the demarcations of the 1884 Berlin Conference, the conquest of Africa by the United States in alliance with Britain, in a US-NATO led operation.

The colonial redivision of Africa. 1913

Libya: Strategic Saharan Gateway to Central Africa

Libya has borders with several countries which are within France’s sphere of influence, including Algeria, Tunisia, Niger and Chad.

Chad is potentially an oil rich economy. ExxonMobil and Chevron have interests in Southern Chad including a pipeline project. Southern Chad is a gateway into the Darfur region of Sudan, which is also strategic in view of its oil wealth.

China has oil interests in both Chad and Sudan. The China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) signed a farreaching agreement with the Chad government in 2007.

Niger is strategic to the United States in view of its extensive reserves of uranium. At present, France dominates the uranium industry in Niger through the French nuclear conglomerate Areva, formerly known as Cogema. China also has a stake in Niger’s uranium industry.

More generally, the Southern border of Libya is strategic for the United States in its quest to extend its sphere of influence in Francophone Africa, a vast territory extending from North Africa to Central and Western Africa. Historically this region was part of France and Belgium’s colonial empires, the borders of which were established  at the Berlin Conference of 1884.

Source www.hobotraveler.com

The US played a passive role at the 1884 Berlin Conference. This new 21st Century redivision of the African continent, predicated on the control over oil, natural gas and strategic minerals (cobalt, uranium, chromium, manganese, platinum and uranium) largely supports dominant Anglo-American corporate interests.

US interference in North Africa redefines the geopolitics of an entire region. It undermines China and overshadows the influence of the European Union.

This new redivision of Africa not only weakens the role of the former colonial powers (including France and Italy) in North Africa. it  is also part of a broader process of displacing and weakening France (and Belgium) over a large part of the African continent.

US puppet regimes have been installed in several African countries which historically were in the sphere of influence of France (and Belgium), including The Republic of the Congo and Rwanda.  Several countries in West Africa (including Côte d’Ivoire) are slated to become US proxy states.

The European Union is heavily dependent on the flow of Libyan oil. 85 percent of its oil is sold to European countries. In the case of a war with Libya, the supply of petroleum to Western Europe could be further disrupted, largely affecting Italy, France and Germany. Thirty percent of Italy’s oil and 10 percent of its gas are imported from Libya. Libyan gas is fed through the Greenstream pipeline in the Mediterranean (See map below).

The implications of these potential disruptions are far-reaching. They also have a direct bearing on the relationship between the US and the European Union.

Greenstream pipeline linking Libya to Italy

Concluding Remarks

The mainstream media through massive disinformation is complicit in justifying a military agenda which, if carried out, would have devastating consequences not only for the Libyan people: the social and economic impacts would be felt Worldwide.

There are at present three distinct war theaters in the broader Middle East Central Asian region: Palestine, Afghanistan, Iraq. In the case of an attack on Libya, a  fourth war theater would be opened up in North Africa, with the risk of military escalation.

Public opinion must take cognizance of the hidden agenda behind this alleged humanitarian undertaking, heralded by the heads of state and heads of government of NATO countries as a “Just War”. The Just War theory in both its classical and contemporary versions upholds war as a “humanitarian operation”. It calls for military intervention on ethical and moral grounds against “rogue states” and “Islamic terrorists”. The Just war theory demonizes the Gaddafi regime while providing a humanitarian mandate to US-NATO military intervention.

The heads of state and heads of government of NATO countries are the architects of war and destruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. In an utterly twisted logic, they are heralded as the voices of reason, as the representatives of the “international community”.

Realities are turned upside down. A humanitarian intervention is launched by war criminals in high office, who are the unchallenged guardians of the Just War theory.

Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo,… Civilian casualties in Pakistan resulting from US drone attacks on towns and villages ordered by president Obama, are not front page news, nor are the 2 million civilian deaths in Iraq.

There is no such thing as a “Just War”.  The history of US imperialism should be understood. The 2000 Report of the Project of the New American Century entitled “Rebuilding Americas’ Defenses” calls for the implementation of a long war, a war of conquest. One of the main components of this military agenda is: to “Fight and decisively win in multiple, simultaneous theater wars”.

“Operation Libya” is part of that process. It is another theater in the Pentagon’s logic of “simultaneous theater wars”.

The PNAC document faithfully reflects the evolution of US military doctrine since 2001. The US plans to be involved simultaneously in several war theaters in different regions of the World.

While heralding the need to protect America (i.e. ”National Security”), the PNAC report does spell out why these multiple theater wars are required. What purpose do they serve. Are they an instrument of peace? The usual humanitarian justification is not even mentioned.

What is the purpose of America’s military roadmap?

Libya is targeted because it is one among several remaining countries outside America’s sphere of influence, which fail to conform to US demands. Libya is a country which has been selected as part of a military “road map” which consists of “multiple simultaneous theater wars”.  In the words of former NATO Commander Chief General Wesley Clark:

“in the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan…. (Wesley Clark, Winning Modern Wars, p. 130).

by Ron Holland
March 12, 2011
http://www.lewrockwell.com/holland/holland43.1.html

.

The entire world except for government leaders and politicians are thrilled with the revolutionary spirit moving through the Middle East. The leaders of authoritarian regimes from Tunisia to Egypt have fallen and the rest are threatened in every nation in the region. It is my hope that your brave spirit of rebellion against one party rule and foreign backed puppet governments will provide encouragement to people around the world to stand up and follow your example showing how your fear of government tyranny is over.

Most governments ultimately rule and generate tax revenue by threat and force of arms and the only difference is the degree of violence and police state actions. While here in the West, we join you in solidarity for freedom and representative government, please understand that our history over the last 100 years clearly shows how democracy isn’t the panacea claimed by most establishment politicians. Thomas Jefferson described democracy as nothing more than “mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine”. Trust me, democracy can be just as bad and often less efficient than authoritarian dictators, fake monarchs and military rule.

Anthony Wile, chief editor of The Daily Bell has explained the problems of American, democracy better than anyone I know in his Middle East interview yesterday on Russia Today (RT) which broadcasts in English to over 100 nations around the world.

US-style regulatory democracy is a government-intensive approach that seeks to regulate almost every facet of human behavior and uses concerns for people’s “safety” as a justification for tremendous authoritarianism at home and I might add for our Middle East friends, a neocon military policy of aggression, occupation and natural resource control abroad.

The representative features of democracy also have major flaws because this model allows powerful domestic special interests at home or foreign power elites to easily buy off a majority of parliament members and control the government and monetary policies of the nation state. Just as your dictators or monarchies have been controlled by Western interests allowing the pillaging of your natural resources, it is a very simple matter to buy majority control of representatives who should be representing the citizens but instead sell their souls to outside interests.

The worst problem with US-style democracy is the illusion that individuals or voters have power or control over the government. Yes, you get to vote and protest which on the surface might appear an improvement over a government structure controlled by a few at the top but this brings up the fatal weakness of regulatory and representative democracy as is practiced in Europe and the West today.

In order to create the illusion of benefits to voters, these democracies have to borrow massive amounts of money to buy votes and benefits today and most of the burdensome costs are placed on future generations. Therefore sovereign-debt-financed democracy can only exist as long as investors are willing to purchase the treasury debt obligations to finance this kind of welfare/warfare state. Heavily indebted Europe and America are now rapidly reaching the end of this fatal debt Ponzi scheme cycle as the current and future tax revenues cannot service the debt.

The end of the debt spiral is here for the western democracies and this is why the world economy is crashing and inflation is now destroying the ability of the working poor around the world to feed themselves.

The Swiss Solution

A democratic model of representative government restrained by the people is the best solution to controlling politicians at home and to insure your congress or parliament represents the citizens rather than controlled by powerful elites in foreign capitals like Washington or London. It also provides the means for citizens to control government expenditures, deficits and debt creation as well as limiting tax increases and promoting programs which benefit citizens rather than only wealthy financial interests.

In Switzerland, the people still rule and have the ultimate right to decide decisions when the executive, judicial and representative branches of government fail to act in the best interests of the nation. Through the right of referendum they can cancel legislation and with the initiative they can pass or create legislative action on issues parliament refuses to act upon. The Swiss system of direct democracy and decentralized confederation style government protects minority interests and allows different ethnic, language and religious groups to rule themselves in accord with what is best for each community and area.

The Failure of American Style Democracy

Here in America, the electorate does not have oversight over legislation and unpopular government regulations or financial bailouts like in Switzerland. Neither can we initiate legislation to balance the budget, end the deficit or control our foreign policy. We have to depend on our “elected representatives” and as a group they always let us down because private contributions can’t compete with organized special interests.

Imagine if 4% of the American voters signed a petition requiring a nationwide vote “yea or nay” on the banking bailouts, invading another Middle East nation, auditing the Federal Reserve or on the trillions in new Washington debt added because of the financial meltdown? The United States would still be a decentralized republic with limited government if we still had we had the political option to control Washington and the special interests.

While it may not be too late for us here in the United States to return to our first legitimate government, the Articles of Confederation, it will be a difficult task against the powerful people which rule our nation. But for you in the Middle East today who are showing those of us in the West how to stand up to tyranny, elite rule, squandered resources and massive government debts, you have an easier job. But don’t stop with just throwing one corrupt leader out and replacing him with another and don’t buy the propaganda about American-style democracy.

If our system of democracy worked, America would have a balanced budget and we wouldn’t be facing national bankruptcy. Our dollar would be strong, our free-market economy prosperous and we wouldn’t be building empires, propping up dictators, controlling your oil or invading your territory.

The first step to liberty and freedom is to be willing to confront authoritarian regimes and this is happening in every nation in the Middle East now. Just today, police in Saudi Arabia opened fire on peaceful protestors and I believe their days are numbered. The House of Saud is just like all other authoritarian regimes held together by force but ultimately built only on sand which the tides of a people organized can overthrow.

Don’t exchange one dictator for another, one monarch for another or a one-party rule for another one just as controlled by foreign interests or domestic elites as you have today. You see, here in the United States, we throw the bums out every 2 and 4 years without ever changing anything. Don’t make the two mistakes we have made.

Build your system of government based on the successful Swiss model of Confederation government which gives the people the right to create and cancel legislation and laws when your legislative body or leaders fail to follow the majority will of the people. Today, forms of direct democracy, referendums and decentralized government like in Switzerland can easily be created using Facebook and other social media.

You have organized your freedom efforts with social media and these new internet tools can also be used to control a government you establish. Second, after 100 years of foreign intervention and manipulation of governments and leaders in your region, the tools of the Facebook color revolutions can also work to build freedom-oriented institutions and safeguard your freedom movements from foreign intelligence actions against your efforts.

Therefore take into account your religious and cultural traditions in creating a government model and don’t make the expensive mistakes we have made in the West as we like you have also lost control of governments. Your success just might provide the example we need to escape our own forms of political tyranny in the rest of the world
I wish you good luck, prayers and victory in your efforts but remember democracy does not guarantee either freedom or a government controlled by the people. With regret, our loss of freedoms is proof that American-style democracy isn’t the answer.

Ron Holland is a contributing editor to the Swiss Mountain Vision Newsletter and Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Foundation for the Advancement of Free-Market Thinking (FAFMT) in Vaduz, Liechtenstein.

Source:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE6BR0UZ20101228

.

BEIJING (Reuters) – China said on Tuesday it will cut its export quotas for rare earth minerals by more than 11 percent in the first half of 2011, further shrinking supplies of metals needed to make a range of high-tech products. China produces about 97 percent of rare earth minerals, used worldwide in high-technology, clean energy and other products that exploit their special properties for magnetism, luminescence and strength. The rare earth issue could further strain U.S.-China ties, which have been battered this year by arguments over human rights, Tibet, Taiwan, the value of the Chinese currency and North Korean military attacks on South Korea.

Chinese President Hu Jintao is due to visit the United States next month for talks with President Barack Obama that both sides hope can stabilise the vital relationship. Beijing says its curbs are for environmental reasons and to guarantee supplies to Chinese clean energy firms it is trying to promote internationally. But it has also said its dominance as a producer should give it more control over global prices. China’s Commerce Ministry allotted 14,446 tonnes of quotas to 31 companies, which was 11.4 percent less than the 16,304 tonnes it allocated to 22 companies in the first half of 2010 quotas a year ago. China slashed the export quota by 40 percent in 2010. The export restraints on rare earths has inflamed trade ties with the United States, European Union and Japan in particular.

In Washington, the U.S. Trade Representative’s office expressed concern over the latest announcement. ”We are very concerned about China’s export restraints on rare earth materials. We have raised our concerns with China and we are continuing to work closely on the issue with stakeholders,” a USTR spokeswoman said. Last week, the trade representative’s office said China had refused U.S. requests to end export restraints on rare earths, and the United States could complain to the World Trade Organisation, which judges international trade disputes.

TURBINES AND HYBRIDS

Wind turbines and hybrid cars are among the biggest users of rare earth minerals, which analysts say are facing a global supply crunch as demand swells. The minerals are also used in some weapons systems.
This little-known class of 17 related elements is also used for a vast array of electronic devices ranging from Apple’s iPhone to flat-screen TVs, all of which are competing for the 120,000 tonnes of annual global supply.

While industrial users of rare earths in industrialized countries face tighter supplies and higher prices, China’s export curbs have created opportunities to open mines or revive dormant production in Canada, Australia and the United States. After China’s announcement, shares of Molycorp Inc, the Colorado-based company that owns a rare earth mine in California, rose as much as 11.6 percent.

But the headline-driven surge in a firm whose value has tripled since July proved only temporary, in part reflecting the fact that Molycorp’s rare-earth mine in Mountain Pass, California, is due to come back online only late next year. Canada alone has at least 26 publicly traded companies, including Great Western Minerals Group and Rare Element Resources, that have rare earth projects in some stage of exploration.

Jack Lifton of Technology Metals Research, a Chicago-based consultancy, said Molycorp and Australia’s Lynas Corporation Ltd can eventually offset shortfalls from Chinese cuts in supply and refining capacity — but not before early 2013. ”Until one of them can produce commercial quantities of high-purity rare earths on a regular basis, the market will belong to the Chinese entirely,” he said.

In a short statement on its website (www.mofcom.gov.cn), the Chinese Commerce Ministry said it had added more producer companies to the quota list but cut volumes allocated to trading companies.

CLEAN UP, CONSOLIDATION IN CHINA

Japan has been hard hit by the export curbs. Japanese imports of rare earths shrank further in November, reflecting the impact from China’s de-facto ban on shipments of the minerals that was lifted late last month. The European Union has also expressed concern over China’s limiting of rare earth exports, though the bloc’s trade commissioner said earlier this month China had reiterated that rare earth supplies would be sustained. With more than 100 mines and some 40 refineries, “the Chinese seem to be quite serious about cleaning up the sector environmentally and consolidating it,” said Lifton.

Beijing has been trying hard to impose discipline on its chaotic rare earth sector and is expected to establish a rare earth industry association by next May, said Wang Caifeng, an official with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, speaking at a conference on Tuesday. Tougher environmental regulations for the rare earth sector are also expected to be unveiled next year, the China Business News reported on Tuesday.

(Reporting by Niu Shuping, David Stanway and Michael Martina in Beijing; and Roberta Rampton and Paul Eckert in Washington; Editing by Vicki Allen, Will Dunham and Todd Eastham)

Source: TIMES OF KABUL

http://www.timesofkabul.com/?p=777#respond

.

Undoubtedly this is the biggest scandal in US Foreign relations since the US was shot down by the Soviets in the sixties. Then, as now, both sides played out the drama in an iterative manner–neither side letting the other know how much they know. There are clear indications that there is much more to the “Raymond Davis” affair than thePakistanis are letting on. This isn’t about murder and diplomatic immunity. This is mush bigger. Something is very wrong with this picture, and Islamabad is tight lipped because it now has concrete evidence that Mr “Raymond Davis” is linked with the Tehrik e Taliban e Pakistan (TTP) and some of the terror activities that have been happening in Pakistan. The Pakistanis are not stupid. Americans stick out like sore thumbs in Pakistan. When they go running around in their black SUVs laced with Satellite equipment they are tracked, traced and followed. In a cat and mouse game, the contractors can sometimes shake their “tails”.

On other occasions they cannot. In fact the ISI gives them enough rope to hang themselves with. In this case, it seems Mr. Davis fell into a trap and his situation is now fully compromised. In panic Mr. “Davis” used the Nuclear option and killed the two Pakistanis who were trailing him–knowing full well that killing Pakistani spies or those who knew his identity would blow up in this face. He doesn’t have to say much–the equipment he carried tells a long and bloody story. All this is irrefutable evidence in a Pakistani court of law. The Pakistanis have already released the pictures of the equipment and the evidence that they have gathered. Of course they are still holding on to the juiciest details.

The US has postponed the Afghan-Pakistan-US Trilateral meeting, dropped hints about postponing the date of Mr. Zardari’s visit to the US, and floated all sorts of other threats. Normally Islamabad would have been cognizant of the the problems of spoiling its relationship with the sole Superpower. However the smirking Pakistanis are so confident in the validity of their cause, that they are letting the US escalate the issue.

Pakistan has ignored some of the US pressure and has not buckled under intense US pressure. Both General Kayani and Former Foreign Minister Mahmood Qureshi were not very impressed by US posturing. In fact right after their threatening phone calls and messages Islamabad formally charged Davis with pre-meditated murder in the Lahore High Court. The Court promptly remanded Mr. “Davis” to prison for another 14 days of interrogation. There were stories that if Mr. “Davis” does not cooperate, the interrogation would have been upgraded to level 3 (a euphemism for torture). There are reports that despite admonitions from the US Embassy, Mr. Davis is singing like a bird, and has already given enough information to the Pakistanis to get him convicted in any court of law.

The Former Foreign Minister Qureshi publicly confirmed that Secretary of State Hillary Clintonpressured him to “publicly confirm diplomatic immunity of Davis. However, I refused to do so because it was against the factual position in the case.” FM Qureshi’s confirmation that Mr “Davis” is not a diplomat was repeatedly discussed on all 80 TV channels with copies of his passports and visas prominently displayed for the audience. Mr. Quresh said that
“The kind of blanket immunity Washington is pressing for Davis is not endorsed by the official record of the Foreign Ministry,” adding that Washington even “threatened that Hillary Clinton would not meet me at the Munich conference on February 6 if the request was not granted.”

The situation is so polarized that even traditional US allies in Pakistan have condemned the intrusive murders. Mr. Pervez Hoodbhoy who almost never criticizes the US has condemned the “Davis” affair. The PMLN is of course threatened the PPP with a vote of no-confidence.

It is clear that Mr. “Davis” shot the Pakistani operatives knowing full well who they were. The Pakistani authorities have informed the the media that they are very well aware that Mr. Davis was in touch with the “Pakistani Taliban” (TTP). There is conjecture that Mr. “Davis” walked into a trap laid out by the ISI. In fact his contacts were actually ISI agents. All that he said and did is in the hands of the Pakistanis. Mr. “Davis” thought that by shooting the two operatives, he would eliminate the evidence against him. In fact, it made matters worse. Other operatives who were in the vicinity had already taken the necessary precautions. The ISI has leaked information to the media that Mr. “Davis” had crossed a “red line”.

Clearly, the Americans have panicked because the know that the Pakistani side knows much more than it is prepared to admit in public. This is typical behavior when spies are caught with their thumbs up their noses. There are clear indications that Mr. “Davis” has broken down after sustained interrogation in police custody, and has spilled his guts–making the Pakistanis aware of explosive stuff. Its not that this stuff has surprised the Pakistanis. When you have 3000 of these guys running around the country–something gives. The ISI is one of the world’s most powerful spy organizations in the world. It has deep roots in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Nothing that crawls or walks in Pakistan is hidden from the ISI and other agencies. On top of this there is a million man Pakistani army. 180 million Pakistanis are also watching the Americans and reporting on them. The panicked Americans have continually given highly contradictory versions about Mr. “Davis’s” identity and the nature of his assignment in Pakistan.

It is very clear that Mr. “Davis’s” discovery and detention has sent alarm bells ringing all the way to President Obama’s White House. In a way the Pakistanis are amused. They know they have the Americans where they want them–right up against the wall. The Americans are fully aware that the “Davis” case is shaking the very foundations of the transactional relationship with Pakistan. While the CIA, the State Department and the White House think that this is a new discovery–the Pakistanis point to a long trail of evidence that directly points to the US consultants and their hirelings in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The ISI and the Army believe that at the right time, the details of what the Pakistanis know will be revealed to President Obama and the world.

Pakistan and Pakistanis have known for a long time who is behind the TTP (Tehrik e Taliban e Pakistani). Its not that hard to guess. What surprised the Pakistanis was their ability to inflict bloody attacks on the Pakistani military in order to destabilize Pakistani. Mr. Davis is not an isolated incident–there is a history behind much of what is happening in Pakistan–most of which can be correlated to the rise of the US “consultants” and “contractors” in Pakistan. It is pedagogical to note that last year when the ISI put in requests for deep security checks on those coming into Pakistan–the US put up a hissy fit and forced about 500 of these “Davis types” through without any background checks. Is is noted that the ISI became very suspicious of the insistence of the US in getting these guys into Pakistan at short notice. These guys got very special attention–and that has paid off in the arrest and detention of Mr. Davis. This points to the fact that this incident was not just an accident–it was an incident waiting to happen. The ISI was ready to pounce on the situation once it happened.

Pakistan has been very suspicious of these “contractors” especially when Pakistani state institutions were attacked. The attacks on the the Army HQ, and the ISI sent alarm bells among the rank and file of the Pakistani government. The vibrant Pakistani press has also been on the trail and has repeatedly pointed out the facts about the former Afghan intelligence chief Amrullah Saleh (who was eventually fired by Mr. Karzai). However the US security establishment was in cahoots with him.

The Pakistani military and its highly efficient intelligence set-up had concluded a very long time ago that the TTP was being aided by the very sort of free-wheeling “contractors” that Mr. Davis represents. It was just a matter of time when things came to a boil. It is amazing that the Americans are surprised they have finally be caught red-handed. This has happened in the past, but during the reign of President Musharraf, the Americans got away with it and escaped. This time Mr. “Davis” was caught with his hands in the cookie jar.

Over 100,000 American troops in Afghanistan facing the new Taliban “Spring Offensive” are totally dependent on supplies running through Pakistan. The last time Pakistan shut off the spigot, the Americans ran out of toilet paper and had to cut down on food rations. It must have been hard eating food with dirty hands! If the tiff between the US and Pakistan is not resolved the US may face the consequences in Afghanistan. Failure in the Hindu Kush will certainly impact the presidential elections in 2012.

Source: The Pakistan Times

http://www.newpakistantimes.com/archives/31615

.

Once Southern Sudan had become independent it was a matter of time before the other shoe fell. Some wondered how long it would take for the other shoe to fall. It did fall quite quickly–at Tahrir Square. Most Egyptians around the world celebrated the departure of the worst dictator in the Middle East, one who had been weaned on the milk of torture, incarceration and suppression of the will of the Egyptian people. CNN propagated the images of a nation awakened. President Obama explained the meaning of ‘Tahrir” to an American audience that was led to believe that the fall of the Septuagenarian president had in fact ushered in an era of freedom for not only Egypt but the entire Middle East. President Obama should have also explained the meaning of “Field Marshall” (FM).

A Field Marshall is a six Star General. There there have been only two that were ever promoted to that exalted rank by the United States of America (the world’s only Superpower) in the past two hundred years. The fact that Egypt has gotten a “FM” in 1991 shouldn’t surprise anyone. After all it is a very accomplished army and has gained much in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973! Tantawi, the Field Marshall was after all the friend of the Air Vice Marshall and the President. He got his promotion in 1991 for his services in the Gulf War (where he defeated his former comrade  in the UAR). His promotion came right after the Egyptian army demolished all opposition to the sitting president (two years into Mubarak’s second term, and 13 years after the peace accord with Egypt).

Field Marshall Mohamed Hussein Tantawi. Many analysts believe that he engineered the coup against his former mentor Hosni Mubarak

Political Scientists should take note of the fact that Field Marshalls are for life and never retire! Tahrir Square promoted the Field Marshall to President and head of the Supreme Council.

Some revolution!

Before the Filed Marshall took over the cauldron of Egypt, he might have gone through the ritual which Lady Macbeth went through.

“Come, you spirits
That tend on mortal thoughts, unsex me here,
And fill me from the crown to the toe top-full
Of direst cruelty! make thick my blood;
Stop up the access and passage to remorse”

The unsexing will surely help the Field Marshall for the task he is about to venture into. If all indications are right–its going to be a bloody Egypt soon.

The good people (along with the Tweeter flakes, and the facebook flakes) who gathered at Tahrir Square wanted freedom and liberation from the Civilian cover to Army Rule. What they got was pure unadulterated Martial Law. The thin veneer of civilian rule was was peeled away and shipped off to Sharam El Sheikh. The dictator’s family is ensconced in England living in a palace which would put Surrey Palace to shame making it look a Servant Quarter.

Tahrir Square protesters wanted freedom. What they got was Military communiques.

The Egyptian Constitution like all constitutions on the planet gave its citizens certain inalienable rights. Of course Mubarak’s “Mukhabarat” took most of them away. At least last week, there was a constitution, and a semblance of civility. At least an Egyptian could in theory regurgitate sections of the constitution which guaranteed him or her freedom of expression. ‘Till last week he could accuse Mubarak for not following the constitution.

Today the citizens of Egypt have no constitution. Today they have been stripped of all rights. Today they do not have access to any rule of law. If folks think that “it can only get better”, realists may think again. It does get a lot better in a lot of places. As much as we hate to say it eliminating a dictator got a lot worse for folks in Haiti, Algeria and many foreign countries.

If we are to believe the Jerusalem post, it says that “Field Marshal Tantawi committed to status quo”.

The Egyptian Army has taken over–it is the harbinger of all law and order. In an article written by Oren Kessler today “Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi – Egypt’s defense minister, army commander and head of its Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, has emerged as de facto leader of Egypt since Hosni Mubarakstepped down as president Friday and handed control of the country to the military. Beyond the country’s borders, however, little is known about the man who will guide Egypt through a delicate transition period lasting at least until the national elections called for September”.

Let not the ostentatious title fool anyone. Tantawi is a dictator to the core, committed to the ruthless suppression of those he doesn’t want in power. The Ikhwan Al Muslimeen knows this–that is the reason for their disclaimer today. “The MB doesn’t want to come or power or take over the presidency. The MB doesn’t want to be the majority party in parliament”. Reading this statement from the party that fought the British and gave Egypt its freedom was strange. Knowing the facts about Tantawi will explain the reasons why the MB doesn’t want power. It knows the brutality and the ruthlessness of the “Field Marshall”. They saw what the alter-ego of Tantawi did in Algeria. They know how millions were tortured in Algeria. The MB knows that Tantawi uses his henchmen to make sure that blood does not show up on his hands. However no matter how much he hides the blood, CSI forensics will surely find a trail of all massacres back to the Field Marshall.

Let us see what Lady Macbeth said to her doctor:

Out, damn’d spot! out, I say!—One; two: why, then ’tis time to do’t.

—Hell is murky.

—Fie, my lord, fie, a soldier, and afeard?

What need we fear who knows it, when none can call our pow’r to accompt?

—Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him? Macbeth Act 5, scene 1, 26–40  (Lady Macbeth, as has become her wont, sleepwalks through the royal castle. As her waiting-woman and her doctor listen in, she mutters fragments of an imaginary conversation that recalls the night she and her husband conspired to murder King Duncan)

Th Field Marshall and his “Council” may be looking for ways to hide the blood on their hands. The Jerusalem Post describes the “Field Marshall” as follows.

• Tantawi, 75, was raised in Cairo to a family of Nubian origin. In 1956 he joined the army as an infantryman, then completed an officers course and a master’s in military science.
• He served in the Egyptian-Israeli wars of 1956, 1967 and 1973, and in the 1991 Gulf War, helped command US-allied forces in Saudi Arabia that helped remove Saddam Hussein’s army from Kuwait.
• Tantawi has been defense minister since 1991, and general commander of the armed forces since 1995.
• Over the three decades of Mubarak’s rule, Tantawi’s steadfast loyalty earned him the moniker of “Mubarak’s poodle,” according to a March 2008 US State Department cable released as part of last year’s WikiLeaks trove of leaked diplomatic documents.
• The described him as “charming and courtly,” but “aged and change-resistant.”
• “He and Mubarak are focused on regime stability and maintaining the status quo through the end of their time,” the cable said. “They simply do not have the energy, inclination or world view to do anything differently.”
• The cable portrayed Tantawi as an ally committed to preventing another war with Israel, while at the same time noting that his commitment to the regional status quo could also be a liability. The defense minister, it said, remains “mired in a post-Camp David military paradigm that has served his cohort’s narrow interests for the last three decades,” in reference to Israel’s 1979 peace accord with Egypt.
• “In the cabinet, where he still wields significant influence, Tantawi has opposed both economic and political reforms that he perceives as eroding central government power,” it said. “He is supremely concerned with national unity and has opposed policy initiatives he views as encouraging political or religious cleavages within Egyptian society.”
• The cable said Tantawi viewed the military’s role as protecting constitutional legitimacy and internal stability, and that he had signaled a willingness to use the military to control the Muslim Brotherhood ahead of 2008 local election. Oren Kessler Jerusalem Post Feb 14th, 2011.
• The reverie will soon end, however, if he cannot deliver the democratic reforms and civilian government Egypt’s protesters have demanded.

Oren Kessler is right. The Army’s main job is to prevent the real representatives of the people of Egypt from winning the elections.

While Mubarak was a symbol of that torture and the repression, it was his henchmen who were the real culprits responsible for the brutality. Sulieman and Tantawi lived and worked in the catacombs of Egypt working to sap the will of the Egyptians to seek freedoms.

Egypt, and the world stands at the threshold of a colossal tragedy. The more that Tantawi represses the Egyptians, the greater will be the resistance. Now that Southern Sudan (and Northern Sudan which used to be part of Egypt ’till 1956) is independent, this will allow the powers to be to keep watch on the Ikhwan Al Muslimeen. As Northern Sudan moves towards the right, Southern Sudan will not be far behind, moving towards the right under a different banner–the Cross.

The best democracy in the world is better than the worst dictatorship. Egypt had  a dysfunctional democracy, and a constitutional dictatorship. Today it has neither. Today it has Military rule. Worse still, it is Martial Law with an agenda–fully committed to preventing the people from taking power. If it could get any worse–Tantawi is backed by the world’s only Superpower, and also by the most powerful military state in the Middle East. Tantawi might as well rename himself Pinochet and Mohamed Boudiaf–both had the ignominious distinction of preventing the duly elected representatives of the people, in Chile and in Algeria.

As Egypt hurtles towards certain civil war, it is pedagogical to look at the time-line of events in Algeria which could be a vignette to the future of Egypt.

• Algeria like Egypt gains independence from a colonial power–a couple of decades after Egypt in 1962.
• Like Egypt Algeria goes thorough multiple coups ending up with a dictator called Boumedien.
• Like Egypt, popular discontent allowed the penury stricken population to turn to religion and formed a religious part as a reaction to the Western Supported Liberal Fascism.
• 1989 – Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) founded and over a couple of dozen new parties licensed in Algeria. The FIS was patterned on Hasan AL Banna’s Ikhwan Al Muslimeen.
• 1990 – The Algerian FIS wins 55 per cent of the vote in local elections in Algeria. Similar ot the 2005 vote in Egypt where the MB won a sizable portion of the vote.
• 1991 – The Algerian junta elections in June 1991 with severe restrictions on elections hoping to prevent the inevitable FIS victory. FIS reacts by calling general strike. “State of Siege” (Emergency) declared, elections postponed.  Abassi Madani and Ali Belhadj (FIS leaders) arrested, jailed and tortured. Very similar to the situation in Egypt today, where strikes have been banned. The MB still remains banned.
• 1991 December – Algerian FIS wins 188 seats outright, headed towards an absolute majority in the second round. Learning from the 2005 eletroal victory of the MB, Mubarak eliminated them from any representation in the massively rigged election in 2010. Tantawi will prevent the MB from taking power in Egypt under any circumstances. If polls happen in September of whenever–they will be selections, not elections.
• 1992 4 January Algerian Military takes over dissolves the FIS led National People’s Assembly and instituted a five-member Higher State Council. Mohamed Boudiaf, (the Tantawi of Algeria) takes over.  Street gatherings banned, violent clashes break out on 8 and 9 February between FIS supporters and security forces. A state of emergency is declared, the FIS is ordered to disband and all 411 FIS-controlled local and regional authorities are dissolved.
• 1992 29 June – Boudiaf assassinated by a member of his bodyguard. Cycle of Violence increases. The Armed Islamic Group (GIA), a more virulent group than the ISF carries out massively violent operations causing carnage and mayhem among civilians.
• Algeria goes through a decade of a vicious Civil War. No democracy for the Algerians in the near future.

For the skeptics, who don’t believe this will even happen in Egypt–watch how Tahrir Square is cleared in the next few days. This will give us all a window into the future time-line and how much it differs from that of Algeria.

The Ikhwan is a moderate party, more like the Erdogan’s party in Turkey, however the West is very suspicious of it. Like Algeria the Egyptian Army will take preventative measures to halt the march of the Ikhwan Al Muslimeen. It is imperative for the US and Israel to prevent the Ikhwan from taking power. We see this in the tea-leaves.

Field Marshalls never retire, they are for life. We see Tantawi or his nominee in power for a while.