Update on the last country we said we saved

[avaistheone1]

Special report: We all thought Libya had moved on – it has, but into lawlessness and ruin

Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi


A little under two years ago, Philip Hammond, the Defence Secretary, urged British businessmen to begin “packing their suitcases” and to fly to Libya to share in the reconstruction of the country and exploit an anticipated boom in natural resources.

Yet now Libya has almost entirely stopped producing oil as the government loses control of much of the country to militia fighters.

Mutinying security men have taken over oil ports on the Mediterranean and are seeking to sell crude oil on the black market. Ali Zeidan, Libya’s Prime Minister, has threatened to “bomb from the air and the sea” any oil tanker trying to pick up the illicit oil from the oil terminal guards, who are mostly former rebels who overthrew Muammar Gaddafi and have been on strike over low pay and alleged government corruption since July.

As world attention focused on the coup in Egypt and the poison gas attack in Syria over the past two months, Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi two years ago.Government authority is disintegrating in all parts of the country putting in doubt claims by American, British and French politicians that Nato’s military action in Libya in 2011 was an outstanding example of a successful foreign military intervention which should be repeated in Syria.

In an escalating crisis little regarded hitherto outside the oil markets, output of Libya’s prized high-quality crude oil has plunged from 1.4 million barrels a day earlier this year to just 160,000 barrels a day now. Despite threats to use military force to retake the oil ports, the government in Tripoli has been unable to move effectively against striking guards and mutinous military units that are linked to secessionist forces in the east of the country.

Libyans are increasingly at the mercy of militias which act outside the law. Popular protests against militiamen have been met with gunfire; 31 demonstrators were shot dead and many others wounded as they protested outside the barracks of “the Libyan Shield Brigade” in the eastern capital Benghazi in June.

Though the Nato intervention against Gaddafi was justified as a humanitarian response to the threat that Gaddafi’s tanks would slaughter dissidents in Benghazi, the international community has ignored the escalating violence. The foreign media, which once filled the hotels of Benghazi and Tripoli, have likewise paid little attention to the near collapse of the central government.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/special-report-we-all-thought-libya-had-moved-on--it-has-but-into-lawlessness-and-ruin-8797041.html

[Metatron]

1. K&R n/t

[hobbit709]

2. Libya has become Somalia except with oil.

[avaistheone1]

5. It sure has.

Interesting tough that the press is ignoring Libya's spiraling collapse since we went in and saved that nation.

[hobbit709]

6. Big oil got what they wanted. A cut in production to keep prices high.

Their coconspirators in the media don't want to draw attention to that.

[avaistheone1]

11. Your're right. The only mention I have heard of that was a quick

comment from local broadcaster. No one in media is making or wanting to make that connection.

[jsr]

3. $1.1 billion went to MIC in 2011 for this little project

[avaistheone1]

4. We should consider it a hefty investment in our future,

perpetual war.

[deutsey]

7. Mission Accomplished

[malaise]

8. Look the imperialists don't give a flying fuck about local populations

They got what they went for - oil

[oberliner]

12. Isn't the point of the article that they did not get oil?

The article seems to be suggesting that certainly.

[HooptieWagon]

16. Keeping oil OFF the market keeps the price high.

This sure helps Saudi interests, no? And high oil prices keep tarsands oil a viable commodity.

[pampango]

20. So the imperialists (particularly the UK and France since Libya's oil went to Europe) wanted Libya

not to get the oil and keep their gas prices down (at least down by European gas price standards). They really wanted to control Libya's oil so that they could stop its production and raise prices?

Just trying to keep the theories straight in my head.

[HooptieWagon]

23. Depends what oil you hold or can grab.

If you can't get the oil for yourself, you want to keep it off the market so the oil you do control is more valuable.

That is why Iraq was a win-win for US oil interests. Win if they got their hands on it, win if they didn't but kept it off market. Record oil prices and profits during Iraq occupation....

I'm guessing French and UK oil interests driving their foreign policy, just like us. They aren't interested in supplying Brits and Frenchmen with cheap oil...they want to make as much profit as possible from their other oil holdings. Keeping high-quality and cheap Libyan oil off the market accomplishes that.

[sabrina 1]

43. Yes, Libya is Syria now. And anyone who believes 'we care about the victims' and who followed what

happened in Libya after the real mission was accomplished, should probably just stick to reading children's stories about the tooth fairy.

Once Gadaffi was dead, we left those 'victims' to the brutality of the 'proxy army' we call 'rebels'.

The truth is if we had not been in there, France et al, our allies from Qatar and Bahrain and the Saudis, the Libyan Govt would have remained in place because the Libyan people had things pretty good under that government.

So did the immigrants from other parts of Africa who received high pay from the government which they were able to send back to their families.

After we achieved Regime Change, which we lied about as usual, we were gone.

And the country turned into a version of Mad Max descending into chaos with terrorists slaughtering and torturing and robbing innocents. And when those victims begged for help, where were we?

Well, Hillary was boasting about 'the new way we fight wars' with no 'obvious' American boots on the ground, how we use 'proxy' armies now, pretending to be 'rebels'.

Libya went from being a country where it their Social programs, education and medical care, were excellent and where the government paid for homes for anyone who needed one, believing that owning a home is a Right. I doubt there were any homeless in Libya.

Now the invaders from the West are talking about divvying the country up. And guess who will have control of the oil?

Gadaffi was no saint, but what they have now is sheer hell.

Yes, add Libya to our list of 'successes' in bringing 'democracy' to the ME.

[polly7]

45. +1000. nt.

[KG]

9. boy, who coulda seen THAT coming!

[pampango]

10. All sides seem happy Gaddafi is gone even if they agree on little else.

Support was widespread for proposed legislation known as the Isolation Law that would bar some former regime officials from power. Debate over the law stretched on for months, impeding progress on Congress's primary responsibility, which is paving the way to draft a new constitution and hold elections. It also brought to light a deep divide in the country.

On one side stood the Muslim Brotherhood and allied Salafis as well as representatives from cities that had sacrificed the most blood and treasure during the civil war. These hardliners were pushing for an ongoing revolution to uproot just about all of those who played a role in the former regime.

In the opposite camp stood the National Forces Alliance - the secular parties. They want a more moderate law that would apply based on an individual’s conduct under the regime, the version that passed cuts wide and deep across Libyan society, and makes no exception for those who played a significant role in the revolution.

Libya is grappling with the legacies of Muammar Gaddafi’s reign and the civil war that unseated him. In many ways, the real divide is between the people, tribes, and cities that Gaddafi pitted against each other in a strategy of divide and rule, whether they stood with or against him during the war, and how much they suffered.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/groundtruth/how-militias-took-control-post-gaddafi-libya

Part of the divide in Libya seems to be between those who want to bar from government everyone who had anything to do with the Qaddafi dictatorship and those who want to consider "an individual's conduct under the regime" and whether each played a role on the revolution that ousted Qaddafi.

Playing politics by certain rules does not seem to be a lesson that Qaddafi taught Libyans. Rule by gun was the lesson they learned. Libyans will have to unlearn the latter and learn the former in the long run, but that has been true of most revolutions throughout history.

[avaistheone1]

15. There are several excerpts in the article you cited indicating that the

Libyans are Not in fact happy. There circumstances are quite desperate. For example:

Shater was an independent affiliated with the National Forces Alliance (NFA), a party that is largely composed of members of the elite who did not leave Libya and so had to find some form of accommodation with the regime. We were speaking in his home office in Tripoli.

He echoed a common sense of despair about the direction the country is heading. “Things are deteriorating. Inflation is going up. Unemployment is getting worse. Health services [are] very, very bad. Education also. So we are going backwards,” he said. “We will be in this hassle for ten years. We will not be able to build our country in a democratic way, a civil country trying to join the world,” he said. “Unless some blood will be [spilled] in the streets.”

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/globalpost-blogs/groundtruth/how-militias-took-control-post-gaddafi-libya

[pampango]

17. The transition from dictator (or king or tsar) to a more open government is rarely smooth.

That is not an argument that people should be content with their situations and accept kings/dictators as just the way life is. Historically, revolutions have often followed by chaos and crackdowns and new repressive rulers. Just ask the French who had a series of revolutions over 60 years before achieving anything like a open, representative government.

We should do more to help the Libyans through their tough "after revolution" times, but as with the French and the Russians they will have to learn to "play by the rules" rather than "rule of the gun" themselves. It will not be smooth nor quick and there will be (are) desperate times in the process.

They inherited no culture or infrastructure of democracy (just "do as you are told or else&quot ' so they have to create everything from scratch. Their will be plenty of disillusionment just as there was in France a couple of years after their first revolution. I wish the Libyans the best.

[avaistheone1]

18. What are you suggesting we do to help?

[pampango]

22. I don't have a magic answer. I suppose UN peacekeepers would be a good idea

if the government wants that to help control the militias until they develop their security forces. That's all I can think of off the top of my head. I would assume the UN would be willing to do that given their role in the overthrow of Gaddafi.

I certainly would not suggest or support a coup that installs a new dictator. That kind of solution creates "stability" but little else.

Do you have any suggestions?

[Iterate]

40. Don't be misled by international sources or by grudges from the disempowered.

Look at Libyan sources, especially local sources covering local news and you get a different picture. Trouble is, not much is in English, even though the new press freedoms have led to an increase in the number and quality of sources.

I won't try to recap the past two years, but clearly the scope and scale of violence has steadily declined. By far, most serious conflicts are now resolved without injury, but you won't see that by simply looking at the international press. It's just not newsworthy, and it's not on the scale of Gadaffi's military order to "turn the blue sea red with the blood of Misrata."

The election turnout was huge, and with few exceptions the elected officials/parties are still in office. I don't see any sign whatsoever of a coup happening, or that it would be tolerated. Power is too disbursed right now.

Only part of what the national government has been dealing with has to do with the war. By far most of it is in dealing with legacy issues from the Gaddafi regime or with historical conflicts.

Again, not to recap, but here is one small example of many:

Gaddafi loyalists were rewarded with employment in the civil service. That's part of the reason the 10% fought so hard to protect the .001%. They weren't necessarily competent or well paid. But it did give them the opportunity to collect bribes without restraint or otherwise leverage their power with a side business or second job civil service job. It led to endless conflict and irritation. It also exasperated the 15% unemployment.

Then there was this announcement just a few days ago. The subsidies mentioned had also become hopelessly entangled with corruption, as had the judiciary(which is a huge challenge in itself).

Government increases public sector wages by 20 percent
By Ahmed Elumami.

Tripoli, 4, September 2013:

The government is raising salaries of public sector employees by 20 percent, it was announced today.

Speaking at his weekly press conference, the Prime Minister said that there was also the possibility of annual, inflation-linked allowances, provided the state of the economy permitted it.

The salary increases, Ali Zeidan, explained, were part of the plan to remove the subsidies on commodities. It would contribute to improving the income of Libyans and their living conditions, he stressed.

Zeidan also announced that the Council of Ministers (the cabinet) had decided to separately increase the salaries of Judicial Council staff to reflect the important role they played in society.
...
The announcement also comes at a time the authorities are starting to crack down on state-employees having multiple salaries.
http://www.libyaherald.com/2013/09/04/government-increases-public-sector-wages-by-20-percent/

Cynics from overseas can say what they want about that move, but it doesn't strike me as irrational or suggest the need for UN supervision.

[oberliner]

13. Moral: Let dictators be dictators?

And just stay out of it, no matter how badly they treat their populations?

[HooptieWagon]

19. That is the key question.

Which is worse: Bad government, or no government?

It does appear that in countries where there has been a long-ruling dictator, that removing the dictator leaves a leadership void that a fledgling democracy is unable to fill. I do not know the answer. Install a new dictator? Make them a colony with appointed US Governor? Cast them adrift? None of the options seen palatable...

[Spitfire of ATJ]

25. "fledgling democracy"?

More like the days of City States where each town has it's own rules. This is especially true with cities isolated by mile after mile of desert.

[HooptieWagon]

28. Well, democracy was the intent, supposedly, in Iraq.Afghanistan

...and Libya.
Its not doing very well, apparently.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

32. That's because we promote Capitalism and all those young people rising up are a buncha hippies.

[SunSeeker]

26. Exactly. Thinking like an adult is no fun and makes for boring DU posts. nt

[NightWatcher]

14. They refer to Libya as a great glowing successful intervention

It was quick, the dictator was brutally killed, we made money, and no white guys got hurt.

[brooklynite]

21. So...much better to have kept Ghadaffi in power?

and I suppose our support in pressuring Mubarak to step down should be reconsidered?

[HooptieWagon]

29. No question dictators are bad.

And while we are proficient at removing them, we have failed in leaving something better.

Of course, perhaps we are intentionally leaving something no better...easier for the big corporations to exploit. Disaster Capitalism.

[avaistheone1]

39. I just wish our decision-makers would give some thought

to that gem you just posted:

And while we are proficient at removing them, we have failed in leaving something better.

It sounds like something good old Walter Cronkite would pen in summing things up about Libya and about our other Middle East forays.

[Bluenorthwest]

42. Is your assertion that if we were to assist them in rebuilding Ghadaffi would rise from the dead?

Is your assertion that after bombing, only stark abandonment of the target nation is appropriate?
Are you really saying that you can not even understand the post bombing responsibilities we have?
Creepy thinking, bomb them to fuck then go back home in time for dinner at the new fab hot spot. In time to spend those war profits.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

24. Greed does wonders.

[idwiyo]

27. Mission accomplished.

[The_Casual_Observer]

30. Things will smooth out after a new dictator emerges from the chaos.

[ConcernedCanuk]

31. But, but - Iraq is all peaceful and stable now!

.
.
.

And Afghanistan is almost a paradise too . . .

Bombs do WONDERS doncha see?

USA nomba 1!!

CC

[bigwillq]

33. Heck of a job, Obama.

[treestar]

34. But they are not under dictator Gaddafi

There is bad and there is worse. In the US we don't have any idea.

[Starry Messenger]

35. Those of us who had doubts about intervention in Libya were smeared as Gaddafi-lovers. Good times.

[quakerboy]

36. YAY! AGAIN!

[liberal_at_heart]

37. K&R

[Starry Messenger]

38. kick.

[SoCalDem]

41. Empires usually end in violent upheaval

People who have been stifled, see it as an opportunity to either get even or to take over...or both.

[woo me with science]

44. K&R