A New “Revolution” Theory And Its Proud Adherents

As the world is witnessing attempts to reinvigorate the existing hegemony a new theory for “revolution” is being formulated: Intervention to support the [Libyan] revolution is justified and is in the UK’s national interest. Mr. David Cameron, the British prime minister, said this while speaking on the BBC Radio 4’s Today program. He said that intervening was “the right thing to do”. (BBC, “Libya: UK forces should be proud of role, says Cameron”, Sept. 2, 2011)

Moreover, speaking after the Paris Summit on Libya on Sept. 1, Mr. Cameron said “the UK had played a significant military role in the Nato-led operation ... We should be proud of what our forces did.” (ibid.)

Then, the world heard a proud pronouncement from leader of a proud nation as Mr. Cameron said: “I really want to challenge this idea that somehow the Americans see us a weak ally, they don’t - they see us as their strongest and most staunch ally.” He said: “Americans were ‘very impressed’ by what UK and European forces had achieved.”(ibid.)

On the same news-event Guardian made the following report:

Mr. Cameron “hailed Britain’s role in the intervention as ‘very significant’.” He “insisted Britain would remain a ‘full-spectrum player’ in the future, despite defence cuts, and signalled further interventions may lie ahead as he revealed that some members of the Arab League were ‘toughening their stance’ over the situation in Syria.” “[T]here were ‘lots of lessons to learn’ from the conflict in Libya, and that the government would ‘take our time learning them’. Despite trumpeting Britain’s role, Cameron said there was a danger of people in the west ‘taking too much credit for themselves’ for what was really a Libyan triumph.” (“Libya intervention: British forces played key role, says Cameron”)

He “challenged House of Commons library figures that suggested Britain had performed just 10% of all strike sorties, saying the figure was twice that. ‘There were somewhere just less than 8,000 sorties,’ he insisted. ‘Britain performed 1,600 of those, so around a fifth of strike sorties. That is punching at our weight or even above our weight. We played a very important role, not just in the number of strike sorties but also in the fact that we were there right from the beginning.” (ibid.)

“On the lack of intervention in Syria,” according to the report, “he said Britain had ‘been in the vanguard in arguing for a tougher approach’.” (ibid.)

Now, the following observations can be deduced: (1) Intervention is “justified” irrespective of pronouncements in the UN charter. (2) National interests of world powers are integrally connected with “revolution” in some other country. (3) Any south or central or east Asian or Latin American country can expect a Libya Intervention Experience (LIE) if there is any strategic resource in the country or the country is strategically important and intervention-able. (4) Junior partners of the Empire are not now suffering from inferiority complex. (5) The Empire has to be impressed. (6) Coming days may witness reinvigorated effort from the world metropolis to reinforce its hegemony.

Some other facts are there that help understand a “revolution” with companies’ “fair and logical benefits”:

“The race for Libya’s oil appears to have started: […] BP is already holding talks with members of the interim government, while France’s foreign minister, Alain Juppé, said it was ‘fair and logical’ for its companies to benefit.” (Guardian, “Libya: Gaddafi says he will fight to the end – live coverage”)

“The [UK] government has admitted that the international development minister, Alan Duncan, took part in meetings between officials operating a Whitehall cell to control the Libyan oil market and Vitol – a company for which Duncan has previously acted as a consultant” said a Guardian report.

The report said:

“The ‘Libyan oil cell’ involved a group of officials working in the Foreign Office since May waging a quiet campaign against Muammar Gaddafi’s regime by controlling the flow of oil in the country.

“It is said to have played a discreet but crucial role in the campaign in Libya by helping to enforce the sanctions regime to prevent Gaddafi importing and exporting oil while allowing oil to reach the rebels in the east. That oil came via one company, Vitol.

“Duncan, a former oil trader and multi-millionaire, has had a 30-year friendship with the managing director of Vitol, Ian Taylor, at one point operating as a consultant to the company and as a non-executive director to a subsidiary firm. Taylor has also been a Tory donor, declared on Duncan’s parliamentary register of interests.

“Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary, said the government’s disclosure of the existence of the oil cell was mired in mystery about Duncan’s role in it. ‘Given Alan Duncan’s reported links with Vitol this curious briefing from within government actually raises more questions than it answers,’ he said.

“It is understood Vitol had been working with the rebels in the east before the establishment of the cell but had struggled with the sanctions in place amid concerns that Gaddafi was circumventing the restrictions while the rebels were suffering from them.

“Civil servants in the Foreign Office are known to have expressed deep concerns about the existence of the cell, warning that it appeared to be encroaching too far on commercial purposes. One person with knowledge of the Whitehall machinations described their mood as ‘mutinous’.

“Vitol is the largest trader of oil and refined products in the world. The business […] buys and sells more oil and gas than household names such as BP and Shell.

“Vitol handles about 5m barrels a day and controls 200 supertankers and other vessels to move it around the world. The company […] does not control the giant oil fields or petrol stations associated with the likes of BP and Shell but does engage in exploration from Russia to West Africa, as well as storage and a host of other activities. It also turns over revenues of more than $140bn (£87bn) in a good year. It has a presence in every leading oil-producing country, including Iraq and Syria.

“Taylor has retained a good friendship with Duncan since the two met as oil traders at Shell. The Tory politician sat on the board of oil company Arawak until it was bought in 2009 by Vitol. As shadow leader of the house in 2008 Duncan declared donations in the register of members’ financial interests that he received, via the Conservative party, from Taylor.

“Vitol was forced to pay $17.5m in fines in 2007 after pleading guilty to providing kickbacks to Saddam’s Iraq under the oil-for-food programme.

“The business also found itself in court in 1996 over oil deals in Serbia. It transpired that a $1m payment had been made to the Serbian war criminal Arkan and there had been a secret oil deal to provide Slobadan Milosevic’s Serbia with fuel.

“The company was also investigated in 1993 after selling 280,000 tonnes of ‘contaminated’ oil to Pakistan’s state-owned power company causing £100m worth of damage.” (“Government admits Alan Duncan’s links to company in ‘Libyan oil cell’”, Sept. 2, 2011)

“Good wishes” for “revolution” and its connections are now coming to light: “revolution” is “connected” with national interests of the world powers and oil companies’ benefit, with “reputed” oil traders and minister! Everything is “fair” and “just” in war, revolution and friendship! Ethics and moral standing of “revolution stand” above all ethics and morality! These facts are helping people in countries learn lessons in a charged world.