The RCG attack against the Libyan revolutionaries.
Hal | 02.05.2011 14:46
The RCG attack against the Libyan revolutionaries.
The so-called Revolutionary Communist Group have published a astonishing article in 'Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism!' attacking the Libyan revolution. They are using their paper to conduct a smear campaign against their leaders, and they are apparently supporting a ceasefire.
The revolution was inspired by those events in Tunisia and Egypt where the protesters managed to rise up and change the regimes from within. Within Libya the protesters and revolutionaries were gunned down by Libyan security and military forces. The revolution had no choice but to fight back, and in a war every side looks for allies.
Gaddafi has a ally in Chavez and Castro, and China and Russia were not going to do anything when Gaddafi was planning a mass masacre in Benghazi. The RCG doesn't mention this fact. So what were the people of Benghazi expected to do? Fight Gaddafi's airforce and tanks with stones and sticks?
And if the UN hadn't intervened then no doubt the RCG would bring up the fact that the Libyan army was partly armed by the west.
The African Union, Chavez, Castro were all going to sit back whilst Gaddafi was preparing to massacre his own people. And the AU and Chavez's offer of meditating a ceasefire was ridiculous. A ceasefire would have gave Gaddafi more opportunity to kill and torture his own people.
The newspaper also attacks the Provisional National Transitional Council (NTC), but a search of the internet couldn't find any collobaration of their accusations, and this paper is notorious for not citing sources.
The reason that the Revolutionaries and the Libyan people turned to the UN is because nobody else, not South America, Russia, China or AU was going to help stop the massacres.
The RCG newspaper doesn't mention the atrocities commited by Gaddafi, no mention of the thousands detained in Tripoli, or the siege bombardment of Misrata and other atrocities. The just blame everything on Britain, France and the US.
Rightly they condemn the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan and the West's inaction over Gaza, but comparing like with like is politically naive. The world has changed, dictators are being challenged everywhere in the middle-east by revolutionaries. Some regimes like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Yemen are supported by the West, some like Iran and Syria are supported by Russia and China. Of course there is a imperialist struggle betwwen the US and Europe on one side, and Russia and China on the other, and that is why we should all be supporting these revolutions.
Would the RCG have condemned the Socialists fighting against Franco if the socialists had been armed by France and Britain? The left during that period condemned France and Britain for doing nothing, and this allowed Germany and Italy the opportunity to help crush the legitimate government of Spain.
Once the Revolution topples Gaddafi, then we should all insure that the west's backs off and allows the people to develop a new type of democracy.
If anybody wants a read at the article it is posted below
http://www.revolutionarycommunist.org/index.php/international/2156-imperialist-hands-off-libya-frfi-220-aprilmay-2011
The so-called Revolutionary Communist Group have published a astonishing article in 'Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism!' attacking the Libyan revolution. They are using their paper to conduct a smear campaign against their leaders, and they are apparently supporting a ceasefire.
The revolution was inspired by those events in Tunisia and Egypt where the protesters managed to rise up and change the regimes from within. Within Libya the protesters and revolutionaries were gunned down by Libyan security and military forces. The revolution had no choice but to fight back, and in a war every side looks for allies.
Gaddafi has a ally in Chavez and Castro, and China and Russia were not going to do anything when Gaddafi was planning a mass masacre in Benghazi. The RCG doesn't mention this fact. So what were the people of Benghazi expected to do? Fight Gaddafi's airforce and tanks with stones and sticks?
And if the UN hadn't intervened then no doubt the RCG would bring up the fact that the Libyan army was partly armed by the west.
The African Union, Chavez, Castro were all going to sit back whilst Gaddafi was preparing to massacre his own people. And the AU and Chavez's offer of meditating a ceasefire was ridiculous. A ceasefire would have gave Gaddafi more opportunity to kill and torture his own people.
The newspaper also attacks the Provisional National Transitional Council (NTC), but a search of the internet couldn't find any collobaration of their accusations, and this paper is notorious for not citing sources.
The reason that the Revolutionaries and the Libyan people turned to the UN is because nobody else, not South America, Russia, China or AU was going to help stop the massacres.
The RCG newspaper doesn't mention the atrocities commited by Gaddafi, no mention of the thousands detained in Tripoli, or the siege bombardment of Misrata and other atrocities. The just blame everything on Britain, France and the US.
Rightly they condemn the invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan and the West's inaction over Gaza, but comparing like with like is politically naive. The world has changed, dictators are being challenged everywhere in the middle-east by revolutionaries. Some regimes like Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Yemen are supported by the West, some like Iran and Syria are supported by Russia and China. Of course there is a imperialist struggle betwwen the US and Europe on one side, and Russia and China on the other, and that is why we should all be supporting these revolutions.
Would the RCG have condemned the Socialists fighting against Franco if the socialists had been armed by France and Britain? The left during that period condemned France and Britain for doing nothing, and this allowed Germany and Italy the opportunity to help crush the legitimate government of Spain.
Once the Revolution topples Gaddafi, then we should all insure that the west's backs off and allows the people to develop a new type of democracy.
If anybody wants a read at the article it is posted below
http://www.revolutionarycommunist.org/index.php/international/2156-imperialist-hands-off-libya-frfi-220-aprilmay-2011
Hal
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
Not sure what to do
02.05.2011 15:24
It may surprise the UK Left to know that Arabs, Persians, Pashtunes and others don't really give much thought to Israel, we would like everyone in the region to stop killing each other and we would like the IAF to leave the Occupied Lands but apart from that we don't give it the same daily thought that some I have met here in Britain do.
We do care about corrupt, oppressive, undemocratic murderers running countries and killing us.
Something to think about
Iranian student in London
And your point it...
02.05.2011 19:24
The RCG are nutters, but it is in the *public domain* that several of the leading figures now on the Transitional National Council in Benghazi are former members of the regime (I mean as recently as February were in the regime) including Gaddafi's former Justice Minister and Gaddafi's former Interior Minister. Mahmoud Jibril now positioning himself to be the Prime Minister of the "new" Libya is an ex-member of the regime who is a strong supporter of neoliberalism and opening up Libya to western corporate interests. These people naturally are used to dealing with the West - they dealt with the West as part of the Gaddafi regime.
This is the fruits of NATO intervention: Sidelining those who led the original youth revolution in the leadership in favour of ex-regime and pro-west stooges who will make sure that Libya continues to be run in elite interests.
While the siege of Misrata is leading to calls for greater NATO intervention to avert a potential massacre, NATO is blocking ships with arms from getting to the rebels (as reported in the Daily Telegraph)...what rank hypocrisy!
Adamski
fair point
03.05.2011 11:38
As for the hypocracy of the west, well that goes without saying. But whilst the west may be trying to manovere themselves into positions of influence. don't forget that the revolutionaries are also using the west's power to get rid of the very nasty dictator.
As for Iran, the left's hesitancy in supporting the Green movement was because of the fear that America and Israel were planning to attack Iran, especially after 2005, and their were theories that the Green movement was set up by the CIA/MI6. That isn't true, but the world has changed now, and Israel will not be attacking Iran, because the Arab spring has made Israel very vulnerable. So I think the left needs to get it's head untangled and lend support to all the revolutions in the middle-east.
Hal
What now then?
05.09.2011 19:37
J