FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

To the Shores of Tripoli?

by RON JACOBS

It seems reasonable to state that the reason Washington launched its machinery of death against Libya is to insure it would have some input in that nation’s future after Gaddafi’s departure.  The claim of saving civilian lives, while laudable, rings as hollow as ever.  As always this claim begs the question how does a military save civilian lives while destroying civilian lives?  History tells us that this reasoning is only for the folks watching the attacks on television, not for those in the region being subjected to them.  The Arab League, having foolishly believed that Washington and NATO truly exist to save civilian lives, are now regretting their support of military action in the wake of climbing civilian casualties.  Casualties which the US and its posse have denied occurring.

While the US and its European cohorts would probably like to have friendly forces control the entire country of Libya, they may decide to be content with those forces in control of the part already held by the rebels in the east.  On February 28, 2011,Abdessalam Najib, a petroleum engineer at the Libyan company Agico  told a Reuters reporter “Nearly all the oilfields in Libya east of Ras Lanuf are now controlled by the people and the government has no control in this area.”   This area is where a good portion of Libya’s major oil fields and related industry are.  Of course, should it start looking like the anti-Gaddafi forces find themselves unable to hold that territory, one can be certain Rome, London and Washington will figure out a way to put some friendly troops in there.  In fact according to scattered press reports, some from the US may already be there. (reported on WNBI-TV, 3/23/2011, New Bern, NC.)

Beyond Libya lies the greater revolt of the Arab people.  Manipulating this revolt and turning the hopes of the people in the region for genuine democracy into a US-style electoral charade seems to be the best Washington can hope for in the near future.  For those movements unwilling to settle for this, their battle will become more difficult.  It is unlikely that Washington wanted the Egyptian people to go as far as they have.  The current situation with the military in control provides some comfort to Washington, but the urgings of the people to move beyond the military has raised concerns.  Washington can hardly wait until a government more like Mubarak’s is in control.  At the same time, Washington’s fear is that there will never be another government like that in Cairo.  A pro-western military presence in Libya, combined with  the repressive regimes in the sheikdoms and Iraq, would certainly help keep a lid on any further revolutionary stirrings.  Despite this, even Washington understands (and fears) that revolution operates on its own terms.

The pathetic displays of military hardware combined with the crowing of the Wolf Blitzer-types on cable news channels are nothing new.  They shouldn’t piss me off like they do.  The strutting of that hardware accompanied by statistics about death and capabilities is reminiscent of a football locker room before a game.  Without going deeper, suffice it to say that while the aforementioned displays may be pathetic and the crowing by news anchors, the most pathetic displays are those of liberal politicians and their supporters actually believing (for the umpteenth time in the past twenty years) that the US military is doing good.  That launching cruise missiles is defending civilians.  That Tomahawks and F-22s are something other than the weapons of mass destruction commandeered by uniformed men and women who are essentially cowards.  Regarding the other side of the aisle, let me say this.  Hearing John Boehner and other Republicans call for the White House to explain to Congress the nature of the mission is a joke.  It’s not like they have a history of opposing US military intervention or even much  affinity for the constitution.  Their cries to include Congress are as genuine as Barack Obama’s promises to close Gitmo, exit Iraq, and withdraw from Afghanistan by June.  On the other hand. what does Obama have to fear by including Congress?  It’s not like there will be any effective opposition to his imperial foray.

Don’t be fooled by the stage managing of this intervention.  Just because Robert Gates or General Ham (now is that a name or what?) point to the presence of bombers from Norway, Denmark and even (yes, even) from Qatar, the fact is this is Washington’s show.  From the halls of Pentagon City to the shores of Tripoli, the power behind the Tomahawks and bombers is all American.  And so is the hypocrisy.

RON JACOBS is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground and Short Order Frame Up. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. His new novel is The Co-Conspirator’s Tale. He can be reached at: rjacobs3625@charter.net

 

 

Ron Jacobs is the author of Daydream Sunset: Sixties Counterculture in the Seventies published by CounterPunch Books. He lives in Vermont. He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
Dan Bacher
New CA Carbon Trading Legislation Answers Big Oil’s Call to Continue Business As Usual
Wayne Clark
A Reset Button for Political America
Chris Welzenbach
“The Death Ship:” An Allegory for Today’s World
Uri Avnery
Being There
Peter Lee
The Deep State and the Sex Tape: Martin Luther King, J. Edgar Hoover, and Thurgood Marshall
Patrick Hiller
Guns Against Grizzlies at Schools or Peace Education as Resistance?
Randy Shields
The Devil’s Real Estate Dictionary
Ron Jacobs
Singing the Body Electric Across Time
Ann Garrison
Fifty-five Years After Lumumba’s Assassination, Congolese See No Relief
Christopher Brauchli
Swing Low Alabama
Dr. Juan Gómez-Quiñones
La Realidad: the Realities of Anti-Mexicanism
Jon Hochschartner
The Five Least Animal-Friendly Senate Democrats
Pauline Murphy
Fighting Fascism: the Irish at the Battle of Cordoba
Susan Block
#GoBonobos in 2017: Happy Year of the Cock!
Louis Proyect
Is Our Future That of “Sense8” or “Mr. Robot”?
Charles R. Larson
Review: Robert Coover’s “Huck out West”
David Yearsley
Manchester-by-the-Sea and the Present Catastrophe
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail