Protecting civilians or western oil companies?
Wikileaks-released State Department cables from November 2007 and afterwards show the real reason for the mounting U.S. hostility to the Libyan government prior to the current civil war.
Wikileaks-released State Department cables from November 2007 and afterwards show the real reason for the mounting U.S. hostility to the Libyan government prior to the current civil war.
NATO has been dropping devastating bunker-busting bombs on Muammar Gaddafi's home in an attempt to assassinate him. One son and several grandchildren have died but Gaddafi has survived. The State Department cables give background to the hostility directed against Gaddafi by the United States and other NATO powers.
One State Department cable from November 2007 (Wikileaks reference ID 07TRIPOLI967) sounds the alarm of “growing evidence of Libyan resource nationalism” by the Gaddafi government. This was almost identical language employed by the U.S. and British governments against Iranian Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh when he nationalized Iran’s oil field in 1951. Mossadegh was overthrown by a 1953 CIA coup that restored the Shah to the throne. It allowed U.S. and British oil companies to re-take ownership over Iran’s oil until the 1979 revolution.
The crime of “resource nationalism”
Condemning “Libyan resource nationalism” is diplomatic language. The U.S. government was furious that Gaddafi was moving to rein in and limit the power and profits of the western-owned oil giants that he permitted to come back into the country after George W. Bush in 2004 lifted economic sanctions against Libya.
The same cable refers to an angry speech that Gaddafi made in 2006 which was interpreted as a virtual act of war by the oil companies and the U.S. and western governments.
Gaddafi's speech included these unacceptable words: “Oil companies are controlled by foreigners who have made millions from them—now, Libyans must take their place to profit from this money.”
Oil reserves in Libya are largest in Africa
Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa and the ninth largest in the world with 41.5 billion barrels as of 2007. The U.S. government and oil industry surveys conclude that Libya has 63 years of reserves at current production rates if no new reserves were to be found. But Libya is considered to have many unexplored reserves. Libya has been a big prize for the western oil giants both because of the quantity of oil and of the particularly high quality of Libyan oil.
In 2008, according to another leaked State Department cable, Gaddafi summoned Conoco-Phillips Chief Executive Jim Mulva to a meeting in Sirte, Libya. There he threatened to expel U.S. oil companies and “threatened to dramatically reduce Libya’s oil production.”
The oil companies and the State Department, as the cables indicate, were increasingly agitated by Gaddafi’s interference with their operations. The Washington Post, which is a big cheerleader for the U.S./NATO bombing campaign, published a story on June 11, 2011, about the leaked Libya cables: “Labor laws were amended to ‘Libyanise’ the economy, and oil firms were pressed to hire Libyan managers, finance people and human resource directors.”
Gaddafi 2009 speech suggested nationalizing Libyan oil
Another Wikileaks-released State Department cable from Jan. 30, 2009, (Wikileaks reference ID 09TRIPOLI71) discusses a January 2009 speech by Gaddafi, stating, “Muammar al-Qadhafi suggested that Libya and other oil exporting states could nationalize their oil production in view of sharply plummeting petroleum prices.”
The U.S. government fully backed the Saudi monarchy and the Mubarak dictatorship, but turned on Libya—not because the regime violated human rights or democracy, but because Gaddafi sought to limit their power. The oil companies, however annoyed they were by having to work with the Libyan government, would have certainly continued their current business operations. The opening of a civil war inside of Libya in February 2011, however, gave a perfect pretext to overthrow the regime and place in power a government that the NATO powers hope will serve as a client regime.
In any country, Libya included, the masses of people can have many valid and legitimate grievances against their government. Even those who support Gaddafi against the NATO bombers probably have grievances. But the U.S., British, French and Italian governments are at war to protect their own interests. Protecting civilians and promoting democracy is of zero concern to Conoco-Phillips, Exxon-Mobil or any of the other oil giants.
The Wikileaks-released State Department cables make it clear that the basis for U.S. hostility to the Gaddafi regime was about who should control Libya’s vast oil reserves. Should it be Libya or should it be the biggest capitalist oil enterprises from western countries?
“Those who dominate Libya’s political and economic leadership are pursuing increasingly nationalistic policies in the energy sector that could jeopardize efficient exploitation of Libya’s extensive oil and gas reserves,” the November 2007 cable states.
Anti-Gaddafi rebels in Washington, D.C.
In mid-May 2011, just six weeks after the NATO bombing of Libya began, leaders of the anti-Gaddafi rebel movement came to Washington, D.C., for “talks.” They spoke at the U.S.-Libya Business Council. The big oil companies were present. The rebels have employed a public relations/lobbying organization based in Washington, D.C., called the Harbour Group.
The principals of the Harbour Group include Hillary Clinton’s staff director from the 1992 presidential campaign of Bill Clinton. Another served as a spokesperson for the presidential campaigns of Ronald Reagan and other conservative Republicans. The third served as a public relations figure in the last three Democratic presidential conventions, according to Reuters.
“Now you can figure out who’s going to win, and the name is not Gaddafi,” Nansan Saleri, the founder of the Houston-based Quantico Reservoir Impact company told the Washington Post. Saleri, former head of reservoir management at Saudi Aramco, explained why the company wouldn’t do business in Libya until now. “Everything in Libya—everything—had to be approved by Gaddafi or one of his sons,” he told the Post. Saleri continued, “Certain things about the mosaic are taking shape. The western companies are positioning themselves.” Within five years, he predicted, “Libyan production is going to be higher than right now and investments are going to come in.”
Libya today is resisting the new colonialism. The colonizers assign noble names such as “protecting civilians” to their military mission. But their role in Africa and the Middle East during the past decades and centuries deprive such propaganda of any credibility. They rely though on the uniformity of the corporate-owned media coverage about their “humanitarian motives” to disguise their crass and cynical plans in Libya and elsewhere.
One State Department cable from November 2007 (Wikileaks reference ID 07TRIPOLI967) sounds the alarm of “growing evidence of Libyan resource nationalism” by the Gaddafi government. This was almost identical language employed by the U.S. and British governments against Iranian Prime Minister Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh when he nationalized Iran’s oil field in 1951. Mossadegh was overthrown by a 1953 CIA coup that restored the Shah to the throne. It allowed U.S. and British oil companies to re-take ownership over Iran’s oil until the 1979 revolution.
The crime of “resource nationalism”
Condemning “Libyan resource nationalism” is diplomatic language. The U.S. government was furious that Gaddafi was moving to rein in and limit the power and profits of the western-owned oil giants that he permitted to come back into the country after George W. Bush in 2004 lifted economic sanctions against Libya.
The same cable refers to an angry speech that Gaddafi made in 2006 which was interpreted as a virtual act of war by the oil companies and the U.S. and western governments.
Gaddafi's speech included these unacceptable words: “Oil companies are controlled by foreigners who have made millions from them—now, Libyans must take their place to profit from this money.”
Oil reserves in Libya are largest in Africa
Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa and the ninth largest in the world with 41.5 billion barrels as of 2007. The U.S. government and oil industry surveys conclude that Libya has 63 years of reserves at current production rates if no new reserves were to be found. But Libya is considered to have many unexplored reserves. Libya has been a big prize for the western oil giants both because of the quantity of oil and of the particularly high quality of Libyan oil.
In 2008, according to another leaked State Department cable, Gaddafi summoned Conoco-Phillips Chief Executive Jim Mulva to a meeting in Sirte, Libya. There he threatened to expel U.S. oil companies and “threatened to dramatically reduce Libya’s oil production.”
The oil companies and the State Department, as the cables indicate, were increasingly agitated by Gaddafi’s interference with their operations. The Washington Post, which is a big cheerleader for the U.S./NATO bombing campaign, published a story on June 11, 2011, about the leaked Libya cables: “Labor laws were amended to ‘Libyanise’ the economy, and oil firms were pressed to hire Libyan managers, finance people and human resource directors.”
Gaddafi 2009 speech suggested nationalizing Libyan oil
Another Wikileaks-released State Department cable from Jan. 30, 2009, (Wikileaks reference ID 09TRIPOLI71) discusses a January 2009 speech by Gaddafi, stating, “Muammar al-Qadhafi suggested that Libya and other oil exporting states could nationalize their oil production in view of sharply plummeting petroleum prices.”
The U.S. government fully backed the Saudi monarchy and the Mubarak dictatorship, but turned on Libya—not because the regime violated human rights or democracy, but because Gaddafi sought to limit their power. The oil companies, however annoyed they were by having to work with the Libyan government, would have certainly continued their current business operations. The opening of a civil war inside of Libya in February 2011, however, gave a perfect pretext to overthrow the regime and place in power a government that the NATO powers hope will serve as a client regime.
In any country, Libya included, the masses of people can have many valid and legitimate grievances against their government. Even those who support Gaddafi against the NATO bombers probably have grievances. But the U.S., British, French and Italian governments are at war to protect their own interests. Protecting civilians and promoting democracy is of zero concern to Conoco-Phillips, Exxon-Mobil or any of the other oil giants.
The Wikileaks-released State Department cables make it clear that the basis for U.S. hostility to the Gaddafi regime was about who should control Libya’s vast oil reserves. Should it be Libya or should it be the biggest capitalist oil enterprises from western countries?
“Those who dominate Libya’s political and economic leadership are pursuing increasingly nationalistic policies in the energy sector that could jeopardize efficient exploitation of Libya’s extensive oil and gas reserves,” the November 2007 cable states.
Anti-Gaddafi rebels in Washington, D.C.
In mid-May 2011, just six weeks after the NATO bombing of Libya began, leaders of the anti-Gaddafi rebel movement came to Washington, D.C., for “talks.” They spoke at the U.S.-Libya Business Council. The big oil companies were present. The rebels have employed a public relations/lobbying organization based in Washington, D.C., called the Harbour Group.
The principals of the Harbour Group include Hillary Clinton’s staff director from the 1992 presidential campaign of Bill Clinton. Another served as a spokesperson for the presidential campaigns of Ronald Reagan and other conservative Republicans. The third served as a public relations figure in the last three Democratic presidential conventions, according to Reuters.
“Now you can figure out who’s going to win, and the name is not Gaddafi,” Nansan Saleri, the founder of the Houston-based Quantico Reservoir Impact company told the Washington Post. Saleri, former head of reservoir management at Saudi Aramco, explained why the company wouldn’t do business in Libya until now. “Everything in Libya—everything—had to be approved by Gaddafi or one of his sons,” he told the Post. Saleri continued, “Certain things about the mosaic are taking shape. The western companies are positioning themselves.” Within five years, he predicted, “Libyan production is going to be higher than right now and investments are going to come in.”
Libya today is resisting the new colonialism. The colonizers assign noble names such as “protecting civilians” to their military mission. But their role in Africa and the Middle East during the past decades and centuries deprive such propaganda of any credibility. They rely though on the uniformity of the corporate-owned media coverage about their “humanitarian motives” to disguise their crass and cynical plans in Libya and elsewhere.
Homepage:
Comments
Hide the following comment
Addition - TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE NATO-AGGRESSION IN LIBYA
14.06.2011 11:57
On May 26 this year in Moscow, an International Conference "Tribunal against the NATO aggression, in Libya” was held, which was attended by more than 30 people, including the Deputy Ambassador of Libya to Russia, a delegation from Ukraine, a representative of the Communists in Slovakia, several scientists-Arabists, and representatives of the anti-globalists. Presentations were made by tele-appeals on the conference theme from the Czech Republic and Canada. The event was organized by representatives of the public organization “Veche”. Reports and about fifteen speeches were also heard. Without exception they were for the independence of Libya, support for al-Gaddafi, and sharply condemned the aggressive actions of the U.S. and NATO in Libya. The speaking representative of the AUCPB, S.V. Khristenko emphasized the actual identical nature of the objectives and methods of Hitler's fascism and current American imperialism.
The main report “On urgent measures by international civil society on organizing means to combat global aggression and compulsion to the world of aggressor states", declares-
"Today, once again is acutely raised the issue countering the aggressive behaviour of the United States, European Union and NATO on the world stage. Yesterday it was the aggression against Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan. Now we are talking about the open military invasion into the territory of another sovereign state - Libya. The arrogant and unceremonious violation of the sovereignty of an independent nation causes in the world community not only outrage but also fear that tomorrow the victim of brutal aggression may become any other state with resources which a global aggressor requires. The probability of Russia being on the list of potential victims is also quite high.
Unfortunately, we must note that in the world after the collapse of the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact military alliance, there is simply no active force capable of resisting such aggression. It would have seemed that the role of a barrier to aggression should have been played by the United Nations as a guarantor of international law. However, experience shows that this organization is deprived of the opportunity to provide any meaningful impact on the processes occurring in the global arena in a uni-polar world, and the UN has actually lost capacity for this. The Security Council of this organization discredited itself by Security Council Resolution number 1973, grossly violating the UN Charter itself. If in the near future the most determined efforts are not made, the only guarantor of international security in the face of the UN will be completely incapacitated and discredited ... "
In conclusion, the Conference unanimously adopted the summary document (one of which we publish below), and plans are formulated to address the critical issues:
To:
1. Organize and conduct an "International Tribunal to investigate the crimes of the U.S. and NATO against Libya, involving non-governmental organizations, political parties and Governments concerned.
2. In as much the UN for its criminal actions has completely discredited itself and made itself illegitimate in terms of preserving and maintaining peace on earth, the peoples of the world must decide what needs to be done here.
3. The Decisions offer a clear plan of action for achieving the goals, showing that the organizers of the International Conference are going to really struggle for the implementation of initiatives.
Appeal to the heads of states, political parties, public and religious figures, to all people who cherish peace and security on our planet
- To assist in the preparation and holding of a World Forum “The International Tribunal to investigate the involvement of individuals, organizations and states in the aggression against the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, on measures of public forcing the aggressors to stop aggression and damage to persons, organizations, states, and victims of aggression.
We, participants of the International Conference on urgent action by international civil society on organizing methods to combat global aggression and forcing the world to live like the aggressor States, on behalf of the free citizens of the world, appeal to the Heads of State, the management of non-governmental organizations, political parties and social organizations, religious leaders of all confessions, and ordinary people of our planet with a proposal to support efforts to organize and conduct in the 2011 World Civic Forum an "International Tribunal to investigate the involvement of individuals, organizations and states in the aggression against the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and measures by the public forcing the aggressors to stop the aggression and reparation damage to persons, organizations, states, victims of aggression."
The holding of a World Civic Forum is due to the need to mobilize the world community to confront the global aggression against sovereign states, which have been carried out for many years by the United States of America, the states of the NATO military-political bloc and its military and global financial allies.
The United Nations, acknowledged to be the guarantor of international law and the inviolability of the basic principles of peaceful coexistence of nations, has failed to prevent armed incursions of the aggressors onto the territory of several independent states, thus did not meet our hopes for a peaceful future for our generation and our children.
The only force on the planet today that can stand in the way of aggression and establish peace on earth, was, is and will be the force of the self-organized community of citizens from different countries, united for the sake of world peace. Only the ordinary citizens of the world are fully interested in that there are no falling bombs and missiles filled with uranium raining down on the heads of their mothers and children. The person who realizes himself or herself first and foremost as a father and mother of their children, is genuinely interested in confronting aggression directed against both his family and the people and against the country in which he or she lives. It is we, ordinary citizens, most of all are interested in peace and stability on our planet.
The aggression unleashed by the U.S. and NATO against the sovereign state of Libya, should be halted immediately. The crimes committed by participants and organizers of the armed invasion, are subject to trial before the world civic community. The organizers and accomplices of the crimes are subject to prosecution before the international community.
We, participants of the conference call on heads of states to give full organizational, informational and material support to the World Civic Forum, as well as to consider the advisability of combining the World Civic Forum with the summit of heads of states that are potential targets of the destructive intentions of the global aggressor. At the summit, we propose to lay the foundations for a new system of relations in the world, based on the rule of the sovereignty of countries and states. The question should also be brought up on the reforming of the United Nations, which has not been able to effectively counteract the flouting of international norms and laws, or to replace the UN by a workable alternative to the international organization.
We, the participants call upon all who are interested in establishing peace on earth, regardless of their nationality and religion, to unite their efforts and inflict a decisive blow to global aggression. Let this World Civic Forum be a precedent for a new, truly democratic form of strengthening international law and equitable world order!
We urge all those who struggle in solidarity with the Libyan people against the aggressors, those who want peace on our planet, to take an active part in the preparation of the International Tribunal over the aggressor in the summer of 2011.
The implementation of this civil initiative, the holding of an extensive investigation and public court over the aggressors is possible only with your personal moral and material support.
For a world without aggression! For a world without war! For world peace!
Participators in the International Conference
May 26, 2011, Moscow
FB
Homepage:
http://aucpbenglishwebsite.blogspot.com/2011/06/tribunal-against-nato-aggression-in.html