By Hector Vega. World War II in many respects was an oil war. Lacking sufficient supplies in its imperialist expansion, Germany turned to oil sources in the Caucasus and Japan invaded Indonesia. When the nationalization of Iranian oil industry [1951], the British government organized a general and in 1953 the CIA carried out a coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.
In 1956, when Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, controlled a key passage in the transport of oil to the West, France England and Israel invaded the Sinai and the Gaza Strip. In the early '70s in their fight for control of oil and after the convertibility of the dollar and the successive devaluations of 1971 and 1973, OPEC countries as a result of the war [October 1973 Yom Kippur ] declared an oil embargo which raised oil prices by more than 250%.
After Angola's independence in 1975, the CIA together with separatist movements and the multinational Chevron-Texaco oil plotted to take over the enclave of Cabinda, which currently represents almost 80% of Angola's oil revenues, in addition to manganese resources , gold diamonds.
During the Vietnam War was the Mobil off-shore exploration [that territory then known as South Viet-Nam], concession renewed three decades later, height of irony, without positive results, "in Blue Dragon 280 km., Mekong Delta. Indonesia occupying power in East Timor demanded interest on significant hydrocarbon reserves in conjunction with Australia. Recurring conflict in the Spratley Islands, whose oil reserves were claimed by China and Vietnam.
The aftermath of the oil wars have left a trail of victims. Suffice it to cite the statistics of the Gulf War in 1991 to 1.5 million direct death toll in the clashes, in addition to civilians affected by the economic sanctions imposed on Iraq. War in Iraq [March 2003] recorded a balance of 655,000 Iraqis dead, 4.7 million refugees and 5 million Iraqi children orphaned. Experience today resumed operations in the Maghreb and Libya with unpredictable repercussions in the political developments in the region. Nothing has been excluded in these preparations, even the hackneyed invocation of the existence of weapons of mass destruction that Gaddafi would be ready to use against his people [See statements of former Arab League Ambassador Clovis Maksoud and former British Prime Minister John Major]. Note that the General Staff of the Russian Federation made known to the international press that "satellite images taken from space suggest that the alleged air attack that took place on 22 February on Benghazi and Tripoli, were a device used as a pretext for military intervention "humanitarian". "
Obama's remarks, Cameron, Sarkozy, Zapatero and others, prepared a scenario of intervention and coup in Libya, calling for a no-fly zone, suggesting several possible military options generated from NATO. Since March 2, the U.S. Senate voted unanimously to impose an exclusion zone aérea sobre Libia. A lo cual se agrega el llamado de cuarenta neoconservadores en carta al presidente Obama para que desarrolle una inmediata acción militar para derrocar a Kadafi.
La prensa internacional citaba la opinión del general Mattis, Jefe del Comando Central de EEUU que ante el Comité de Servicios Armados del Senado calificaba la zona de exclusión aérea como una operación militar. Pues además sería necesario bombardear las defensas aéreas [misiles tierra-aire] de Libia mediante ataques aéreos lanzados desde bases de EEUU en el sur de Italia.
En lo concreto, un poderoso contingente militar dispuesto a intervenir en una eventual invasión se sitúa frente a las costas de Libia. Se trata de una fuerza Naval 6 countries-Germany, England, USA, Canada, France and Italy, composed of 8 battleships and 2 carriers [including the nuclear aircraft carrier, USS Enterprise], a fleet of Cobra helicopters and military aircraft.
Libya: an unsuccessful bid
industrial powers understood that national security was linked to authoritarian regimes that guaranteed the stability and status quo. Western democracy was said by the silent change, worse, confused modernity access to [health, education, housing ...] that Arab autocrats offered the privileged segment of the population, with the possibility of participation vast majority of the population.
From the outside, Europe, South America, North America, Asia, motley group of self-proclaimed governments for change, mistook their own ideas of democracy with which the Arab people resented in their experience of exclusion, hunger and misery.
Few bothered to understand what was happening in Libya. Political reality based on tribal land away from the traditional Western idea of \u200b\u200bnation-state [the time of the Treaty of Utrecht in Europe, 1713] political practice based on tribal ties from which you build the political organization. Historically
Libya, was part of Roman and Byzantine empires before falling under the hegemony of Arab power and civilization. After the Second World War and while under a British protectorate in fact, the UN handed over power to the sheikh of the tribe and Emir Sanusi of Cyrenaica: Sidi Idris, who proclaimed the reigning monarchy in the name of Idris I. Qaddafi ousted King in 1969 under the inspiration of the pan-Arab and socialist revolution of Gamal Abdel Nasser. It is precisely the Sanusi tribe that started the revolt in Benghazi [province of Cyrenaica] under the flag of the monarchy. Moreover, it is Mohammed Al Sanusi, nephew Idris, Libya's self-proclaimed prince in exile who claims to support "the heroes of the popular uprising" against the Qaddafi regime whom he calls "murderer of his people." Libya
today lives a tribal fight, where an intervention of Western powers will be welded to the price of its sovereignty as has been aligned with a tribe, an emirate, the Benghazi, which means to rule the rest of the territory under its aegis. There will arise a new deal for the extraction of "black gold" suitable for local corporations and a privileged and wealthy elite.
dominant Western powers never saw what was brewing in the Middle East, namely a broad social front, driven by the revolution communications, isolated in his imaginary of participation than the autocrats were willing to concede. When weaving transnational agreements with foreign governments and ruling political class has lost legitimacy because people understood that such arrangements were at the origin of its fundamental weaknesses.
The former colonial powers have believed reissuing old practices and commitments. A bizarre situation recently experienced Cameron's Conservative government when he dispatched an envoy of the Foreign Office to find out "what might be useful" to the interim government of Benghazi. The mission ended in a fiasco for even was received by the Libyan National Transition Council, to be reshipped with SAS special forces who accompanied her, after confiscation of their firearms. Failure that the British foreign minister should explain to the House of Commons.
Five new political realities in the Middle East
Five new political power than the agreements signed with the privileged classes and the imperialist powers which the latter attempted to perpetuate himself in power. Understood too late that the people who came to demonstrate and elections were not enough for what it was today, was to exercise power. Since the beginning of every revolution, and a path of no return, called the maximum, without compromise. It demanded nothing less than full power. Time will tell how to take this political exercise proclaimed from the streets of the city. In any case we can be sure will never be the same in the past.
statements to the media and messages in cyberspace the second new reality show namely awareness of complicity with transnational corporations, foreign governments and local politicians. Today is the voice that circulates in the nations of the Middle East and North Africa and even in closed regimes such as Saudi Arabia's absolute royalty. The claim is not only the removal but there are already cases of corrupt politicians taken to court to answer for illicit enrichment and arbitrariness to the population.
A third point is the reality of communication networks is no longer the exclusive management of radio stations and television officials. Today the public has taken possession of time and space: control communication.
Derived from this is still a fourth point. When the local media stopped being extended to countries and continents. The street called expanded the universe in real time, is transferred back to proposals and calls to action. He felt the call to solidarity and incentives to action. Time will tell how many of these calls were due urgent realities. In short, communications, social impact, they replaced the power of weapons.
Finally, a fifth item related to social development and the environment. The environment became part of social reality and consciousness of the people directly related to large infrastructure works and social development. Suffice it to quote the great artificial river through a pipeline network of over 4,500 kilometers of groundwater supplies to Libya. Water resource estimates provide water to that country for four years in 1800 [See Tajeldine Laila. "Libya, intervention, division or unit." Aporrea.org. Venezuela, 24/02/2011]. Commenting on these resources Fidel Castro wrote "Under this desert was a vast and deep water sea fossils. I felt when I met an experimental area of \u200b\u200bcrops, those waters in the future, would be more valuable than oil "[See" The War of NATO inevitable. " Part II. 02/03/1911. www.fortinmapocho.com]
of how political practice changed the battlefield
What happens in war is not independent of what happens in politics. Neither Kadafi, nor the opposition National Council of Transition Libyan have the ability to decide the situation in the field of battle. The opposing forces in a country of over 1 million km2 700 000 530 000 6 million inhabitants, ie 3.1 inhabitants per square kilometer, village especially in the coastal oil and gas facilities within never surpassed in the beginning Brega fighting in the past thousand armed fighters, and add that these were not decisive support in weapons and personnel. Over the day the fighting forces and increased government pressure which endangered not only the oil and gas supply in Benghazi, but also the control of Ras Lanuf [west of Brega, now in flames after be achieved storage crude oil terminal Es Sider]. Between 5 and 7 March, the government consolidated its position in Ras Lanuf and increased pressure on Brega. Declarations of war correspondents spoke of a decline in the enthusiasm of Brega defenders who were attacked by much higher means which count. Moreover, the army reportedly launched an offensive in Az Zawiyah, a little less than 40 miles west of Tripoli that would already be in possession of government forces.
no space force projection to ground or vice-versa, the opposition understands its limitations and the inability to short-term and current means of achieving a final consolidation in the field. Thus, refusing to foreign forces in the territory, the Libyan National Transitional Council has urged the countries of NATO's statement-fly zone to prevent any attacks by the Air Force Kadafi. With this demand, Benghazi not see or will not see the implications of military intervention in the conflict that has military exclusion zone. In fact, it is a complex operation involving naval, aircraft, AWACS planes, all of this if it has the mandate of the Security Council and the effective support of the countries of the NATO pact. Agreement so far denied China and Russia.
In the past U.S. interventions in Korea Viet-Nam, the air space Kosobo, Iraq twice, Afghanistan, have meant facing the public a significant cost to governments of the Empire. Are the constraints that Obama, a weak president, captive, like all American presidents of transnational arms control and high finance, is not willing to take a year into the campaign the mercy of a defeat their struggle for a new presidential term [01/20/2010 to 01/20/2012].
In short, neither the Council nor Gaddafi Libyan National Transitional Benghazi, Western governments can not rely entirely control the political game surrounding the combat operations.
Western governments, European and American public understand that their views are not willing to embark on warlike adventures, so the war games and operational planning staffs favor options to the city, people and computer networks, are combat elements unpredictable and unmanageable from a potential hub.
The degree of freedom in these conjectures is given by an external force, assuming low demand in Benghazi, an option until the same has been rejected. Reduced civil war
operations of internal forces, it is clear that the center of gravity of the two forces at work [in the sense Clausewitz's] moves into the realm of political support from the population. Lost balance in this area, the operational constraints in terms of weapons, vehicles, communications hardware, supplies .... And loyalties, imply that the returns policy on track and little or nothing left for foreign military intervention.
In the field of international calls Kadafi has requested the site visit [fact-finding mission] of delegations of the United Nations and Arab League. In his recent remarks have included acceptance of a mission in France without limitation information in their field visits.
political realities and the weapons are
In conclusion, the political reality prevails over the logic of the battlefield. This plays to all: the forces of Qaddafi, the Libyan National Council of Transition and the Western powers in calling for his ouster. Add that if it were only heading to Kadafi the solution to be considered as easy and almost banal.
Several policy options open in the solution of the conflict. All within a negotiation process between parties. One could be in the field presence of the Arab League as the only bargaining power or in conjunction with a UN delegation. Another, complementary, diplomacy exercised by President Chávez supported Cuba and Nicaragua. None of these proposals
emergency-cake facade or a political edifice built by an agreement between tribes that no longer exists, can forget the words of the source of power Kadafi, namely, negotiation between tribes. Latter fundamental element and the base of the problem. Limited to discuss the emergency [or the first, ie the cease-fire, evacuation of refugees and humanitarian aid] is placed on this side of the realities that people have demonstrated in the streets. I'm not saying the first thing is not the first, just say that we must consider the political element is central and that the origin of the power of Kadafi, namely the founding agreement between tribes.
In Libya recognizes the existence of 140 tribes of which only 30 dominate the political landscape [statistics produced by A. Faraj Najm, historian Libyan] which concentrate their influence in the urban centers of Tripoli and Benghazi. According
Hanspeter Mattes, the German Institute of Global Studies, an expert on Libya, "the coming to power of Muammar Gaddafi in 1969 became an alliance of Qaddafi's own tribe [the Qadhadhifa] with Warfalla and Maqarha, who won seats Key in the security field, ie in the armed forces, police and intelligence services. This ensured their control. "
In essence, and to understand political processes underway in Libya, Gaddafi develops the concept of tribe. Which is presented as a "social school in which all grow by absorbing the high ideals that end up setting the standard of living behavior. The tribe is an "umbrella" natural social security itself. " For Kadafi the security granted by the tribe is "collective protection in the form of adjustment, revenge and defense." This is based on the bond of blood which is the sublime form of the assignment. Blood and attachment are the core of the tribe which is ultimately the "physical and unique social unit" that ties of blood is in short the "unity original "[See Green Paper].
can not deny the existence of other ideas about the problem. One, discussed by Professor Moncef Uanna Tunis University, author of Military elites and modernization of Libya contemporary [2009] thinks that "it is quite possible that his own tribe [gadafa] force him to relinquish power, because the longer the war lasts, the worse they suffer reprisals. " In his opinion, and the appointment of Gaddafi's Green Book itself is reinforced, "the tribal revenge is still the rule." "Therefore," adding that it "could push him into exile in Venezuela, which is still an option" [Or other] directly settled. " Others see a split Libya and Somalia hazy destination. [1]
But not in vain rebel movements have emerged in societies of the Middle East and there are ongoing civil war. Thus the five Middle Eastern political realities mentioned above play an important role. Realities that necessarily affect negotiators.
The first challenge is that the path of negotiation goes beyond the traditional ways of diplomacy. For what is at stake are secular institutions of society and the passage to wrenching changes in tradition. And that does not manage even on a settlement between parties, foreign leaders.
In fact the leaders, that for decades the negotiators have understood any, notice to State level, have changed. No longer exist. This is most noticeable in the case of Latin American leaders at some point were related to the Arab world. Also a major fact: social actors are different.
How to understand the exercise of power claimed in the street but in the context of new social actors to claim their place since the occupation, profession, university, or circumstantial traditional jobs, in order from the consciousness of the farm where it is mixed nationalism with the predominance of social control on new forms of government?
Moreover, in these days in the Arab world have seen the presence of women on the streets. Women in traditional dress, niqab or burqa traditional megaphones to the crowd seeking information. That did not start yesterday or the day before yesterday. It is simply a social reality that has always existed in Islamic societies profoundly unknown to the Western world.
bargaining behind the street, to cliques reserved, no longer possible under the reality of new forms of communication and social dynamics, encouraged by these new social actors.
was born a new form of legitimacy to fight to impose a reality of the tribe in a still traditional society. Thus, neither the Western powers, nor any negotiators have the same effect, prior to today's social movements born in the Middle East. In a sense the new Libya and why not say it, the new societies of the Middle East result from the legitimacy of the practice of arms which the people confronted the police and repression of the praetorian guards, but very fundamentally new political convictions are welded to the arms and add in the case of Libya, under the sign of the negotiation of the tribes.
0 comments:
Post a Comment