Klaus Hart Brasilientexte

http://www.adital.com.br/site/noticia.asp?lang=PT&cat=22&cod=54966

„Diante da situação de guerra os presidentes dos países da América Latina, se pronunciaram e, em sua maioria se posicionaram de forma contrária ao bombardeio. Alguns líderes latino-americanos acreditam que o ataque tem interesse comercial e visa apenas o petróleo do território líbio.“

Brasilianischer Politikexperte Fiori zum Libyenkrieg:  http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2011/04/04/libyenkrieg-streit-der-westlichen-machte-um-strategische-ressourcen-darunter-erdol-zahlt-zu-motiven-betont-brasilianischer-politikwissenschaftler-jose-luis-fiori-in-folha-de-sao-paulo/

http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2011/03/23/protest-in-sao-paulo-gegen-libyen-krieg-zumeist-araber-und-arabischstammige-islamische-wurdentrager-verurteilen-zudem-gewalt-in-bahrein-jemen-saudi-arabien/

„Einige lateinamerikanische Führer glauben, daß die Attacke ein kommerzielles Interesse hat und lediglich auf das Erdöl Libyens zielt.“

http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2011/03/24/die-eigenartige-doktrin-des-humanitaren-bombardements-brasiliens-schriftsteller-und-kolumnist-verissimo-zum-libyenkrieg/

Auf dem UNO-Index für menschliche Entwicklung liegt Libyen auf dem  53. Platz, der Iran auf dem 70. und Brasilien abgeschlagen auf dem 73. Platz. 

Oded Grajew:  http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2011/03/25/sarkozy-obama-die-deutsche-regierung-nennen-die-jetzigen-vorgange-in-der-arabischen-welt-eine-uberraschung-weil-sie-auf-die-mobilisierung-der-zivilgesellschaft-nicht-achtgeben-weltsozialforum/

http://www.hart-brasilientexte.de/2011/03/21/das-historische-foto-barack-obama-und-diktaturaktivist-jose-sarney-damaliger-chef-der-folterdiktatorenpartei-arena-des-militarregimes1964-1985-prosten-sich-in-brasilia-2011-zu/

GADDAFI AND THE WESTERN POWERS

Frei  Betto*

The Western powers led by the USA vociferously defend human rights in Libya. What about the genocidal occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan? Who tolls the bells for the million dead in Iraq? Who takes confessed assassins in Afghanistan, responsible for crimes against humanity, to the UN International Court of Justice? Why does the UN Security Council not say a word against the massacres practised against the peoples of Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine?

Defending human rights in Libya is not what interests the USA or the European Union. They are interested in the control of a region which produces 1.7 million barrels of oil daily on which countries such as Italy, Portugal, Austria and Ireland depend for their energy.

Iraq is a case in point: the USA invented Saddam Hussein’s never to be found “weapons of mass destruction” in order to control a country which is the second largest oil producer in the world – 2.11 million barrels a day only surpassed by Saudi Arabia. It possesses a reserve calculated at 115 billion barrels. Add to this wealth the fact that it occupies a strategic geographical position bordering Saudi Arabia, Iran, Jordan, Kuwait, Syria and Turkey.

March 20 2011 will be eight years since the USA and partners invaded Iraq under the pretext of “establishing democracy”. Malik’s government is far from what could be considered a democracy. Last February thousands of Iraqis took to the streets demanding work, bread, electricity and drinking water. The army brutally repressed them, killing some. arbitrarily detaining others and abducting activists. No world power clamoured for human rights nor did they suggest that Malik be questioned by international courts.

Sadly, the UN today is a discredited institution. The US use it in order to approve resolutions which justify their role as the global police force at the service of a system which is unjust and excluding. When the UN approve resolutions contrary to White House policy – such as the condemnation of the Cuban blockade or the oppression of the Palestinians – the latter turns a deaf ear.

Gaddafi has been in power since 1969, a dictatorship of 42 years. Why have the US and the European Union never considered overthrowing him? Because, in spite of his terrorist assaults, it was convenient to keep a despot there as he attracted foreign investment and impeded the emigration to Europe of illegal immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa i.e. all countries south of the Sahara desert.

Now that the Libyan people clamour for freedom, the USA take up strategic positions in the Mediterranean. Amphibious craft, aircraft and helicopters are transported by warships US Ponce and US Kearsarge. The European Union on the other hand are not concerned about democracy in Libya but about avoiding  millions of refugees from landing on the shores of their countries which are weakened by the financial crisis.

They also fear that the freedom wave devastating the oil producing Arab countries will raise the price of the product and place an even greater onus on the western powers who struggle with difficulty to overcome the crisis in the capitalist system

There is talk of establishing a “no-fly exclusion zone” in Libya. This means bombarding airports in the country and all aircraft stationed there. It demands the sending of aircraft carriers to the African coast. In other words: a new war front.

The fact is that the White House was surprised by the freedom movement in the Arab world and now doesn’t know how to proceed. It was more comfortable to continue to support authoritarian regimes in exchange of sources of energy such as gas and oil. But how to oppose the clamour for democracy and avoid the risk of the governments of those countries to fall into the hands of fundamentalists?

Gaddafi rose to power with ample popular support when he overturned the tyrannical regime of King Idris in 1969. Bitten by the blue fly, he soon forgot all the promises of freedom he had made. In 1974, taking advantage of the world recession, he threw out western companies, expropriated foreign property and promoted a series of progressive reforms which improved the Libyans’ quality of life.

With the end of the Soviet Union and since 1993, Gaddafi welcomed foreign investment. After the fall of Saddam, fearing  he might be next, he signed agreements to eradicate weapons of mass destruction and compensated victims of his terrorist attacks. He became a fierce hunter of Osama Bin Laden. He requested entry into the IMF, created special zones for free trade, opened the country to trans national oil companies and eliminated subsidies for basic food products.  He started a process for the privatisation of the economy increasing unemployment by almost 30% and increasing social inequality.

Gaddafi merited praise from Tony Blair, Berlusconi, Sarkozy and Zapatero. Similarly to the Eastern powers, he wasn’t happy with the overturn of the tyrannical governments of Tunisia and Egypt. Now he fires against a disarmed population which aspires to oust him from power.

For Eastern powers, Gaddafi has become expendable. The problem now is how to actually get rid of him without opening a new war front, turning Libya into a “protectorate” controlled by the White House. If Gaddafi resists, Bin Laden could gain one more ally or at most a competitor in matters of terrorist threats.

The West talks about democracy. The interest is oil. For capitalism all that matters is: privatising sources of wealth. While the logic of capital predominates over the logic of freedom the West will never recognise true democracies, those where the majority of the people decide the destiny of their own country.