RT | Exactly six years ago, on October 20th, 2011, Muammar Gaddafi
was murdered, joining a long list of African revolutionaries martyred by
the West for daring to dream of continental independence.
Earlier
that day, Gaddafi’s hometown of Sirte had been occupied by
Western-backed militias, following a month-long battle during which NATO
and its ‘rebel’ allies pounded the city’s hospitals and homes with
artillery, cut off its water and electricity, and publicly proclaimed
their desire to ‘starve [the city] into submission’.
The last defenders of the city, including Gaddafi, fled Sirte that
morning, but their convoy was tracked and strafed by NATO jets, killing
95 people. Gaddafi escaped the wreckage but was captured shortly
afterward. I will spare you the gruesome details, which the Western
media gloatingly broadcast across the world as a triumphant snuff movie, suffice to say that he was tortured and eventually shot dead.
We
now know, if testimony from NATO’s key Libyan ally Mahmoud Jibril is to
be believed, it was a foreign agent, likely French, who delivered the fatal bullet.
His death was the culmination of not only seven months of NATO
aggression, but of a campaign against Gaddafi and his movement, the West had been waging for over three decades.
Yet it was also the opening salvo in a new war - a war for the militarily recolonization of Africa.
The
year 2009, two years before Gaddafi’s murder, was a pivotal one for
US-African relations. First, because China overtook the US as the
continent’s largest trading partner; and second because Gaddafi was
elected president of the African Union.
The significance of both for the decline of US influence on the continent could not be clearer. While Gaddafi was spearheading attempts to unite Africa politically, committing serious amounts of Libyan oil wealth
to make this dream a reality, China was quietly smashing the West’s
monopoly over export markets and investment finance. Africa no longer
had to go cap-in-hand to the IMF for loans, agreeing to whatever
self-defeating terms were on offer, but could turn to China - or indeed Libya
- for investment. And if the US threatened to cut them off from their
markets, China would happily buy up whatever was on offer. Western
economic domination of Africa was under threat as never before.
The response from the West, of course, was a military one. Economic
dependence on the West - rapidly being shattered by Libya and China -
would be replaced by a new military dependence. If African countries
would no longer come begging for Western loans, export markets, and
investment finance, they would have to be put in a position where they
would come begging for Western military aid.
To this end, AFRICOM -
the US army’s new ‘African command’ - had been launched the previous
year, but humiliatingly for George W. Bush, not a single African country
would agree to host its HQ; instead, it was forced to open shop in
Stuttgart, Germany. Gaddafi had led African opposition to AFRICOM, as
exasperated US diplomatic memos later revealed by WikiLeaks made clear.
And US pleas to African leaders to embrace AFRICOM in the ‘fight against
terrorism’ fell on deaf ears.
After all, as Mutassim Gaddafi,
head of Libyan security, had explained to Hillary Clinton in 2009, North
Africa already had an effective security system in place, through the
African Union’s ‘standby forces,' on the one hand, and CEN-SAD on the
other. CEN-SAD was a regional security organization of Sahel and Saharan
states, with a well-functioning security system, with Libya as the
lynchpin. The sophisticated Libyan-led counter-terror structure meant
there was simply no need for a US military presence. The job of Western
planners, then, was to create such a need.
0 comments:
Post a Comment