, by Pier Francesco Zarcone
Libya deserves a specific discourse because the first had to have his shoulder Popular withdraw the local dictator, and a civil war is under way on the duration and the outcome is not predictable, which has divided the country into rebel-controlled area and the area still under the control of Tripoli. Libya, then, affects much closer to Italy, both for oil and for the large plots economic / financial ESTABLISHED in recent decades. Let's start with them.
The tyrant who bought the West
As always capitalists and managers of capital have replaced the heart and conscience with the portfolio and money, not surprising at all embarrassed the dismay with which the economic and financial center 's West have welcomed the Libyan revolt (which we hope will end well). Una prestigiosa rivista portoghese ha dedicato a Muhammar Gheddafi (Khadafi, in arabo) un articolo dal titolo assolutamente azzeccato: “Il tiranno che comprò l’Occidente”. Al G20 realizzato all’Aquila nel luglio del 2009 è stato palese quanta importanza i cosiddetti “grandi della Terra” attribuissero al folklorico Colonnello travestito da umile beduino della Sirte; in realtà egli è ricco sfondato, in quanto il patrimonio all’estero del suo clan è ritenuto di almeno 50.000 milioni di dollari; e in atto Gheddafi disporrebbe di liquidi in patria per 65.000 milioni di euro. Il suo sdoganamento internazionale si deve all’indimenticato George W.Bush, e da allora Gheddafi ne ha fatti di affari e di soldi. I Libici possono pure essere massacrati ma in Italia, Gran Bretagna, Germania e Turchia si fibrilla per la sorte del “cane pazzo di Tripoli”, ottimo partner economico e ancora in grado di fare brutti scherzi per vendetta. Oltre che a pensare al prossimo arrivo di profughi non certo per aiutarli. L’Italia - e non solo grazie a Berlusconi, perché anche il centrosinistra è stato complice - costituisce il maggior partner commerciale della Libia; poi vengono Germania e Regno Unito. Ma questi paesi non sono stati i soli ad aprire le porte a chi fino a non molto tempo fa era considerato un pericoloso fomentatore di aggressioni nell’Africa subsahariana e di terrorismo internazionale. La palma spetta però all’Italico stivale, with greater acceleration after the Treaty of Friendship in August 2008. Today the Italian Government seems in line with other European governments and the UN for sanctions policy toward Qaddafi, but once again the famous duplicity of our own government has done to see: Italy has not yet frozen the assets of Gaddafi and or Libya, while the U.S. have done so for at least 25 billion. In Italy Gaddafi has made a good investment package, which justifies the phony "technical closure" of the Milan Stock Exchange on 22 February, was actually due to the fear that the power of the Colonel was abbattuto.Non we'll make sure a tedious inventory, remember only a few elements: Colonel Sirtica is the fifth individual investor (for turnover) on the Milan stock; his own business - the Lafico - has a 2% stake in Fiat, 7.5% of that of Juventus, the Libyan Investment Authority (LIA) has 1% of Eni, the Libyan capital dell'Unicredit 7.5% (ie, the major Italian banks) to 2,500 million euro, and between 2008 and 2010 the Central Bank of Libya, the Libyan Foreign Bank Leah and I bought an additional 6.9%, and while the UN Security Council is turning over un'deale daisy to determine what to do to the scheme of Tripoli, it was reported that Libya had just bought the 2% of the shares of Finmeccanica, which is eighth world producer of weapons and equipment aoreospaziali and a major supplier to the Pentagon. Not to mention a large investment in Britain, Germany and Turkey. Speaking of Turkey, it was revealed two months ago that in Libya there is even a "Gaddafi Prize for Human Rights" (sic), which was awarded the turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, in the face of his country's multibillion-dollar contracts with Libya. Finally it should be noted how little sense it makes distinction between heritage and the Gaddafi family, on the one hand, Libyan and other companies, because Gaddafi in Libya is (was?) The master. The former ambassador Sergio Romano, rightly, spoke about "balance." Italy - which is the image of the kiss of Berlusconi in an effective allegory of Gaddafi's foreign policy - always ready to change sides, however, does not do much with the spirit of the dictator's "fourth shore", as if he would make her the trick to give way to massive sales of its Italian investment - perhaps to raise cash and pay mercenaries, as well as out of spite - all economic observers agree that it would be an economic disaster for the stock homegrown and the economy in general. However, it does not seem that the Berlusconi government is concerned that much of it. Unconscious or who know more than many others? Moreover the more "circumspect" Italian financiers (and foreign) is now racked my brains on the problem, "but if it falls Khadafi, with whom we do business? What types are the successors? Unfortunately we can not yet say whether these tormenting problems materialize, because Libya is the situation - at best - stalled. Gaddafi in front of the masses as best armed, and in the hands of a flood of money flowing liquid with which it could do with some speed, mercenaries and arms. This is because - even if the revolt, from 15 February until now, has taken possession of Cyrenaica and is extended to Tripoli - Gaddafi maintains control of Most airports and air bases, particularly with regard to that of Sabha in the Fezzan (ie in the south of Libya), to be used without problems for African mercenaries to arrive.
The standoff plays into the hands of Gadhafi
When the opponents do not appear next to the conquest of Tripoli and Gaddafi appears to be far from putting your hands on quickly to the east. However, he tries to fight back. He believes that it may have, including military and mercenaries, yet about 12,000 fighters. The Arab League is a bell'organismo that there is - of course, also taking into account what are the Arab governments. What is certain is that the stalemate in the field of battle affects the theoretical options available to foreign powers with an interest in the fall of Qaddafi, but in a way not yet determined. This profile is first examined in and of itself, and then based on the data in existence today. In the first perspective is to say that foreign intervention area - that of U.S. or NATO - could maybe break down physically Gaddafi, but the political costs that would be huge for the Libyan people and in perspective for the same heavy U.S., in As the Arab League was opposed and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (certainly more appreciative of Berlusconi) has had occasion to point out that NATO must not allow "even" thinking to armed intervention. However it is not absolutely excluded. On the other hand we have that the rebel soldiers cried out for help, at least as sending armamenti.La stalemate plays into the hands of Gadhafi. Beyond its repeated threats of bloodshed momentous, perhaps it is not unreasonable to suppose that he is aware of the pay (for him) of a negotiation that does not see it yet defeated. One could speak of a specific strategy: in the absence of the opportunity to regain the Cyrenaica, maintain and enhance the control of Tripolitania. Doing so may also be able to divide the Arab public, and their respective governments, through the danger of division Libya, and a possible Balkanization of the area. A division of Libya with Gaddafi master of the western part would be like a time bomb. Dealing with such a character even in the field and unpredictably hostile and eager to take revenge on all its partners who have given up in times of need, gives rise to an easily imaginable scenario. And that could push influential Arab governments to broker a truce and negotiations between Gaddafi and the opposition. Move the possibility of Western intervention, but - in view of how you would certainly Gaddafi - would be a blow to the rebels. Unless some Arab state decides not to give them military aid such as to defeat the dictator.
"humanitarian" and tribalism
The stalemate could end up with Gaddafi that gathers more strength before moving to the reconquest of the eastern territories, and then an outside military aid to the rebels in Benghazi and Tobruk could take shape. The problem lies in "who" implementing it, because the "who" are the "price" and it would be crucial to the people and the country's future. We're so used to the crocodile tears of imperialism first of its "humanitarian interventions", which then are classic military interventions, and believe just about to Libya, especially since in this If we are faced with a different attitude from that view to the facts Tunisians and Egyptians. At one point Gaddafi chose to do business with imperialism and make him do. That ease could not guarantee him a perpetual condition of its partners, which today are primarily concerned about the fate of the vast energy resources of Libya, the largest in Africa. But there is something more sinister at work to cast a shadow " Humanitarian implemented by imperialist powers: riflettiamocile a moment. The ongoing Arab riots threaten the "established" belt of pro-US Arab governments, and two nodal points of it - Tunisia and Egypt - the guarantor of "stability" sono caduti; quei paesi si trovano in una fase transitoria dagli esiti dubbi che potrebbe portare a un rafforzamento dei nazionalismi, quanto meno. Per questo la Libia assume un indiscutibile ruolo strategico in virtù della sua posizione mediana proprio fra Tunisia ed Egitto. Un’eventuale “normalizzazione” della crisi libica al preezzo di un’ipoteca politico/militare dell’imperialismo andrebbe davvero contro gli attuali regimi di Yemen, Bahrain, Oman ecc.? Favorirebbe le istanze di liberazione delle masse arabe?La risposta positiva può provenire solo da un inveterato ingenuo. Si deve avere il coraggio storico di ribadire che i governi insediati a Washington, Londra, Parigi ecc. restano sempre dei comitati di affari delle rispettive bourgeoisie and multinational corporations, or their executors. And what is the act of these fine individuals to the Arab world (and beyond) now you should know. It is therefore not random, but significant, that the conservative British Daily Telegraph newspaper on February 24 that it was written after the 2008 economic crisis, and after the fall of two key Arab governments strategically, you will see the behavior in front of the Libyan crisis if the United States will accept the reduction of their status as a great power "with kindness, or if you respond with violence, as empires have difficulty in the historical tendency to do." One way out unless there is dramatic and potentially dangerous, if someone - Not necessarily West - had the intelligence, culture and capabilities needed to exploit a peculiar feature of Libya, which helps to make it a different matter. We refer to the fact of the extreme tribalization of Libyan society, in which the relations of belonging to each tribe and clan to which they are composed, take precedence over all other social ties, private and public, including the national one. Various tribes have already spoken against Gaddafi, but others are missing. This is a situation which could make the Colonel very vulnerable, if only you convince other tribes - with tools and materials - to move from the of the rebels, and then all would be resolved among Libyans. Otherwise, it will still be a disaster.
0 comments:
Post a Comment