The media has just revealed that French, UK and US secret service operations in Libya have been ongoing for a number of weeks, if not months. It is of course impossible to anticipate uprisings anywhere on the planet, and even if secret services are instigating to overthrow a government, it means nothing without popular and/or institutional support at some level.
Apparently, the French have been in Libya since October 2010 trying to undercut the regime and collecting intelligence to determine how to help in the overthrow. The British operatives (MI-6) were parachuted into the country and caught trying to gather intelligence for air strikes and acting as liaisons for rebels. Could the situation in Libya be a creation of the 'Crusading Trio's' intelligence services?
Let us consider that the CIA worked with a very small group of group in implementing counterinsurgency operations in Iran in 1953, and it was successful in overthrowing reformist leader Mohammad Mosadeq. The following year, it used similar tactics and it overthrew Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz. Counterinsurgency operations are kept small and can rely on a segment of the population rising up against the regime that the operation intends to remove.
I want to make it very clear that both Arbenz and Mossadeq were by all indications genuine reformers and interested in promoting social welfare, whereas Gaddafi by all indications is nothing more than a dictator interested in wealth and power rather than public welfare. That Gaddafi is a self-interested corrupt dictator has nothing to do with the merits of the issue of the 'crusading trio's' secret and overt operations intended to serve the corporate interests of their nations at the expense of their own taxpayers who foot the bill for the war in Libya.
I wonder how Muslims world over will react when they discover that the CIA, MI-6 and French intelligence services have been active in Libya, supplying weapons to rebels. And what about Obama signing CIA authorization before NATO members had the opportunity to vote on military operations, indicative of the kind of move that is reminiscent of Nixon and Reagan. I wonder if Germany knew exactly what the 'crusading trio' was doing all along and felt that there was nothing in it for them? Could it be also the case that the 'crusading trio's' secret operations in Libya have become public because they want to quell uprisings in the pro-West Arab states by letting Muslim know that the uprisings have a Western hand behind them?
I am adamantly against conspiracy theories, unless of course they are substantiated by hard evidence. I always believed that conspiracy theories were the stuff from which mystery novels are written and movies made for commercial reasons. But how can anyone blame anyone else in the world for believing that the uprising in Libya, perhaps in other countries as well, has been engineered by the CIA, MI-6 and the French secret service?
Conspiracy theories have more weight when empirical evidence is provided to support them. The revelation that the 'crusading trio' secret services have been involved in Libya - working through Egypt, Tunisia and the Gulf states - can only undermine the rebels, even if they prevail as I expect that they will eventually. Of course, there are always surprises and who knows how long this will last. As the body count is rising on both sides, including victims of bombs dropped by the 'crusading trio', the question of legitimacy will be raised for the rebels who are now known to have CIA-MI-6 and French intelligence services behind them.
Meanwhile, the US that is cutting all kinds of social programs has spent over $500 million for Libya - the other $500 million by the EU allies - and if this thing lasts, who knows what the price tag will be to American workers and the embattled middle class? UK that has even worse economic problems than the US is also spending a great deal for the Libyan operations. Ultimately, these operations help to distract domestic public opinion from very serious social and economic issues, and it provides a temporary identification of the sitting government with the flag.
Therefore, besides the obvious purpose of launching such operations that would secure oil fields on the cheap, the goal is political for domestic consumption, and geopolitical as the aggressor intervenes in order to have a voice in determining the regional balance of power. All of this is easy to digest for those analyzing international relations, but here is something that may difficult to swallow even for hard-nosed analysts - why have the leaders of the 'crusading trio' Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama lying to their own citizens while insisting they were telling the truth? Why the Nixon syndrome all over again in the early 21st century? Could it be because the political economy is on shaky grounds with all the sociopolitical consequences for the popular base of bourgeois political parties?
Apparently, the French have been in Libya since October 2010 trying to undercut the regime and collecting intelligence to determine how to help in the overthrow. The British operatives (MI-6) were parachuted into the country and caught trying to gather intelligence for air strikes and acting as liaisons for rebels. Could the situation in Libya be a creation of the 'Crusading Trio's' intelligence services?
Let us consider that the CIA worked with a very small group of group in implementing counterinsurgency operations in Iran in 1953, and it was successful in overthrowing reformist leader Mohammad Mosadeq. The following year, it used similar tactics and it overthrew Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz. Counterinsurgency operations are kept small and can rely on a segment of the population rising up against the regime that the operation intends to remove.
I want to make it very clear that both Arbenz and Mossadeq were by all indications genuine reformers and interested in promoting social welfare, whereas Gaddafi by all indications is nothing more than a dictator interested in wealth and power rather than public welfare. That Gaddafi is a self-interested corrupt dictator has nothing to do with the merits of the issue of the 'crusading trio's' secret and overt operations intended to serve the corporate interests of their nations at the expense of their own taxpayers who foot the bill for the war in Libya.
I wonder how Muslims world over will react when they discover that the CIA, MI-6 and French intelligence services have been active in Libya, supplying weapons to rebels. And what about Obama signing CIA authorization before NATO members had the opportunity to vote on military operations, indicative of the kind of move that is reminiscent of Nixon and Reagan. I wonder if Germany knew exactly what the 'crusading trio' was doing all along and felt that there was nothing in it for them? Could it be also the case that the 'crusading trio's' secret operations in Libya have become public because they want to quell uprisings in the pro-West Arab states by letting Muslim know that the uprisings have a Western hand behind them?
I am adamantly against conspiracy theories, unless of course they are substantiated by hard evidence. I always believed that conspiracy theories were the stuff from which mystery novels are written and movies made for commercial reasons. But how can anyone blame anyone else in the world for believing that the uprising in Libya, perhaps in other countries as well, has been engineered by the CIA, MI-6 and the French secret service?
Conspiracy theories have more weight when empirical evidence is provided to support them. The revelation that the 'crusading trio' secret services have been involved in Libya - working through Egypt, Tunisia and the Gulf states - can only undermine the rebels, even if they prevail as I expect that they will eventually. Of course, there are always surprises and who knows how long this will last. As the body count is rising on both sides, including victims of bombs dropped by the 'crusading trio', the question of legitimacy will be raised for the rebels who are now known to have CIA-MI-6 and French intelligence services behind them.
Meanwhile, the US that is cutting all kinds of social programs has spent over $500 million for Libya - the other $500 million by the EU allies - and if this thing lasts, who knows what the price tag will be to American workers and the embattled middle class? UK that has even worse economic problems than the US is also spending a great deal for the Libyan operations. Ultimately, these operations help to distract domestic public opinion from very serious social and economic issues, and it provides a temporary identification of the sitting government with the flag.
Therefore, besides the obvious purpose of launching such operations that would secure oil fields on the cheap, the goal is political for domestic consumption, and geopolitical as the aggressor intervenes in order to have a voice in determining the regional balance of power. All of this is easy to digest for those analyzing international relations, but here is something that may difficult to swallow even for hard-nosed analysts - why have the leaders of the 'crusading trio' Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama lying to their own citizens while insisting they were telling the truth? Why the Nixon syndrome all over again in the early 21st century? Could it be because the political economy is on shaky grounds with all the sociopolitical consequences for the popular base of bourgeois political parties?
1 comment:
Thanks to update your past. I search blog exactly appear to your blog. Yes I agree this is very powful content. Bye Regards
Post a Comment