Blairs
Visit To Libya:
Its About Oil, Got Iit?
By Chris Marsden
and Barry Grey
28 March 2004
World Socialist Website
Those
who were taken in by the moralistic posturing of the US and British
governments in their war propaganda against Iraq would do well to consider
Thursdays visit by British Prime Minister Tony Blair with Libyan
leader Colonel Muammar Gadhaffi on the outskirts of Libyas capital
city, Tripoli.
Both Washington
and London draped themselves in the mantle of righteous indignation
over Saddam Husseins role in the killing of innocent civilians
during his years in power, claiming that the Iraqi strongmans
use of poison gas and other crimes branded him a terrorist and placed
him beyond the pale of civilized society. Their recourse to the mass
murderer line became all the more strident as the official pretext
for the warIraqs alleged stockpiles of weapons of mass destructionwas
exposed as a tissue of lies.
Yet little more
than a year after US and British forces invaded Iraq and toppled the
Hussein regime, the image of Blair shaking hands with Gadhaffiuntil
recently a fervent advocate of terror against the West and the self-confessed
author of the most deadly terrorist attack ever to occur in Europe,
the 1988 bombing of an American Pan Am jet over Lockerbie, Scotlandwas
beamed around the world. Gadhaffi, who had for decades been branded
a rogue leader and pariah, was now to be seen as a force for peace and
partner in the war on terror.
Why was Saddam Hussein
beyond redemption, while Gadhaffi could be welcomed back into the fold?
(The supposed moral transformation of the Libyan leader shows that the
pendulum of imperialist politics can swing both ways. Not only can a
one-time ally of the free worldSaddam Hussein when
he enjoyed the support of Washington in the 1980sfind himself
transformed overnight into an international bogeyman, but an enemy of
mankind like the old Gadhaffi can suddenly become a force for peace
and progress.)
The case connecting
Libya to terrorist acts is far more easily made than similar charges
levelled against Saddam Hussein. Though there are still many unanswered
questions, Libya has formally accepted responsibility for the Lockerbie
bombing, which took 270 lives. It handed over two of its citizens for
trial, of whom one was convicted, and has also agreed to pay compensation
to the Lockerbie relatives.
While there are
those who still question Libyas and Abdel Baset al-Megrahis
guilt, the British government certainly does not.
Gadhaffi in the
past made repeated declarations of support for terrorist attacks on
the Western powers, and he provided both political and financial backing
for the Irish Republican Army when it was still engaged in armed conflict
with Britain.
Libya only officially
renounced terrorism last August, when it handed a letter to the United
Nations Security Council accepting responsibility for Lockerbie. But
this was enough for Gadhaffi to be granted a clean bill of health.
In contrast, repeated
denials by Baghdad of any link with September 11, Al Qaeda or any other
militant Islamic group fell on deaf ears, as Washington and London combined
to insist on such connections in the absence of any evidence or convincing
political rationale.
The same contrasting
picture is apparent on the issue of weapons of mass destruction. Blairs
visit took place just 15 weeks after Libya agreed to abandon its WMD
programmes and surrendered a 20-tonne stockpile of mustard gas and nerve
agent precursors. In contrast, Iraq was subject to 12 years of intensive
weapons inspections, repeated military attacks and punitive sanctions
that laid waste to the country. Even after all this, after far more
extensive decommissioning had taken place with no evidence of WMDs remaining,
the carpet bombing of Baghdad began.
No political concern
was of sufficient magnitude to stop Blair from rushing to visit Gadhaffi.
He knew that there would be the danger of adverse publicity, particularly
since he flew to Tripoli after attending the Spanish state funeral for
the 190 victims of the March 11 Madrid terror bombings. But rather than
delay his flight, he sought to negate a possible backlash by sending
his Middle East minister, Lady Symons, to secure the support of the
UK Families of Flight 103 campaign group, and no less than Foreign Secretary
Jack Straw to speak to the mother of police officer Yvonne Fletcher,
who was allegedly shot dead by a Libyan diplomat outside Libyas
London embassy in 1984.
Those families of
British people killed on the orders of the Libyan regime who backed
Blairs trip did so out of a genuine desire to lessen the threat
from terrorism through dialogue with Tripoli, but that was far from
the top of the list of Blairs own priorities.
After greeting Gadhaffi,
Blair spoke of his hope for a new relationship. This includes
sharing intelligence information on Al Qaeda, but its more substantial
fruits were made clear by the accompanying announcement that the Anglo-Dutch
Shell oil company had signed a deal worth up to £550 million ($1
billion) for gas exploration rights off the Libyan coast.
Libya has over 30
billion barrels of proven oil reserves, worth upwards of £600
billion, and currently produces 1.4 million barrels daily. Western companies
have been prevented from exploiting these resources by the sanctions
imposed after Lockerbie, but all that is changing.
Blairs declaration
that since he has renounced chemical weapons Gadhaffi is now a partner
in the war on terror also means that Britain can start a
lucrative arms trade with Libya.
This has already
begun. British Aerospace (BAE), the UKs largest arms firm, is
said to be in advanced negotiations for a major trade deal
with Libya. Given that an arms embargo is still nominally in force against
Libya, BAE has insisted that it is only discussing civil aviation
requirements such as airport infrastructure, air traffic
management, safety and regulatory issues. But Blair made clear
that such diplomatic considerations will soon be swept aside.
He has promised
that to compensate Libya for renouncing chemical weapons, the Ministry
of Defence will help Libya build a conventional army and air force.
This would probably involve training Libyan cadets at the British Armys
officer academy, Sandhurst, and dispatching military advisers to Tripoli.
Gadhaffi was a Sandhurst pupil in 1967.
Blair hopes to seize
the initiative for Britain in a massive programme of arms sales. A government
official has confirmed to the Scotsman newspaper that Britain is pushing
hard for an end to the arms embargo in the next few months
and has started to help Libya with its thinking on military
issues to take decisions for their legitimate security needs in
their changed circumstances.
The Scotsman notes
wryly, This, translated, means the Libyans will very soon need
advice on which weapons to buy.
Oil and gas exploration
and weapons sales are worth billions, but so too are the contracts that
could be forthcoming for various infrastructure projects in the beleaguered
country.
The final benefit
for Blair in making his trip to Libya is political. Both London and
Washington have utilised Gadhaffis pledge to abandon its WMD programmes
as proof that the war on terror is workingand that
other countries fear being subject to the treatment meted out to Iraq
and will either be forced to change their ways or face the same fate.
Blairs sense
of urgency in consolidating diplomatic and trade relations with Tripoli
is in large measure due to potential competition from Italy, Germany,
France and others.
The United States
is determined not to lag behind, despite being the main architect of
Libyas 15 years of sanctions. Blairs visit to Tripoli was
immediately preceded by a slightly less high profile trip by the US
special envoy to the Middle East, William Burns.
The first high-ranking
US official to visit Libya since the 1969 coup that brought Gadhaffi
to power, Burns handed over a letter from President Bush that an official
said dealt with bilateral relations and the international situation.
The US has already re-established a diplomatic presence in Tripoli after
more than 20 years.
Secretary of State
Colin Powell said the US and Libya were moving ahead with the political
roadmap laid out after Libya agreed to abandon WMD programmes.
The US is planning
to ease restrictions under the International Emergency Economic Powers
Act to allow US citizens to spend money in Libya, thus enabling American
oil companies to negotiate deals in advance of the formal lifting of
US sanctions. US oil companies have not been able to work in Libya since
1986.
The attitude of
American oil giants such as Occidental Petroleum and Exxon Mobil was
summed up by Bruce Evers, an analyst at Investec Investment Banking,
who told the New York Times, Clearly this is going to put a lot
of pressure on Bush to get in there and make things happen for the Americans.
It is not every day that an OPEC member comes out and says, Come
on down.
The diametrically
opposed treatment of Iraq and Libya is not due to fundamental differences
between the regimes of Saddam Hussein and Colonel Gadhaffi. Notwithstanding
the invocations of humanitarian concern for the Iraqi people and other
rhetoric associated with the so-called war on terror, Iraq
was conquered so that the US could establish its hegemony over the oil-rich
Middle East. Libya is now being courted out of the same essential considerations.
London may have stolen a march on its European rivals, but the Bush
administration will demand the lions share of Libyan oil contracts
as payback for its billion-dollar investment in the Iraq war.