North African Regime Change (25th February 2011)
My suspicions have been triggered; a spider-sense that we aren’t getting the big picture. Is the increasing violence in North Africa a demonstration of inhumane governments? Or is it a coordinated civil war, orchestrated by Western agencies in a quieter and more sophisticated way than Iraq? We’ve certainly seen this before, in South America during the 20th Century and throughout the Cold War.
A Word from Noam Chomsky (17th April 2011 )
Just today I noticed On Libya and the Unfolding Crises, which is an interview by Noam Chomsky from 30th March 2011.
In states lacking major hydrocarbon reserves, tactics vary, typically keeping to a standard game plan when a favored dictator is in trouble: support him as long as possible, and when that cannot be done, issue ringing declarations of love of democracy and human rights - and then try to salvage as much of the regime as possible.
The scenario is boringly familiar: Marcos, Duvalier, Chun, Ceausescu, Mobutu, Suharto, and many others. And today, Tunisia and Egypt. […]
[…] Libya is rich in oil, and though the US and UK have often given quite remarkable support to its cruel dictator, right to the present, he is not reliable. They would much prefer a more obedient client.
Obviously he’s said it all far better and with a great deal more credibility and detail than I was able to. The rest of this blog entry is as I wrote it at the time.
Iraq War
We were told that the regime was wrong and we should go to war with them. Anyone rising up against that government would be encouraged. It was their right to protest and require a new leadership.
Once the Coalition had forced a government into place which it liked, the story changed. Protesting against the government was now wrong, just as it had been under Saddam Hussein. People who faught the government were terrorists. Just like they were labelled under Saddam Hussein.
At all stages of that conflict, which is still ongoing, we were very selective about whose rights were protected. Anyone who made our access to the oil less safe was said to be making the country less safe. Their right to protest, to require a new leadership, was ignored. They were ‘terrorists’.
North African Civil Wars
Now, in a new theatre, we are seeing an organised and coordinated civil war. The people protested against their leadership.
Their leadership reacted to keep the peace, protect property and so forth. All the things Western governments do. Within this year, over student protests, for example.
Violence was triggered (how it was triggered doesn’t matter) and the West supported it. Huh? People have taken arms against their government, in organised and apparently effective force. They’ve overwhelmed the native armed forces. They’ve damaged government buildings.
Local malitias and warlords are the controlling force in many areas. Just like they have been at times during the Iraq war. Yet this time, we are told they are the goodies.
How are they not ‘terrorists’ and ‘insurgents’? How are they not ‘destabilising the region’? Could it be they are doing what the West wants… or even under secret leadership from the West?
South American Coups
It would hardly be the first time. Read through some of the long de-classified documents of civil uprisings and outright assassinations orchestrated by the usual suspects. Western agencies, particularly the CIA, were behind it all. 20th Century international interference, the Cold War, this kinda thing is old news.
Triggering, facilitating, leading, financing… that’s what Western agencies do. Of course, everything knows how we (mainly the USA) funded Al Queda when they were fighting the Russians for us. Funny how they changed from being the good guys to the bad guys. And then how Russia changed from the bad guys into the sort-of good guys…
I’m seeing a pattern. Is anyone else?
Suggestions
Our agenda is the one being fulfilled, not the African people’s. It’s more subtle than Iraq but just like South America; like a case study based on Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.
When the fight suits our interests we turn a blind eye to the facts. What’s staggering is how the media is utterly unilateral in it’s support of civil war. As a casual and occassional viewer (like the majority) I have yet to see a single quote or interview with any government officials in any affected nation.
It’s old-school propaganda, old-school media manipulation, old-school regime change. All that’s new is using the modern, Internet-savvy, civilian protester as the puppets and pawns.
In 50 years time, I reckon we’ll find our own goverments’ fingerprints all over these uprisings.
Why Blog About It?
Having the box for Amnesty International’s Irrepressible Information campaign is usually enough for me. There’s usually plenty of people and coverage of sensible points of view. Unreported World still exists on Channel 4 and Current TV still has Vanguard.
There just doesn’t seem to be anyone asking crucial questions this time, though. Such as: “What’s really going on? Who is positioning themself to benefit from it?”
EU Approves UK Arming of Syrian Rebels (28th May 2013)
William Hague requested permission from Europe to sell arms to rebels in another country to shift the balance of power. Europe said that’s fine.
QED, afaict!