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.
