Who was Reagan
LIBYA the chief of Libyan diplomatic affairs, Ali Triki, explained that Tripoli was in no way involved "directly or indirectly" in these terrorist attacks, which it "vigorously condemned." He described these attacks as "deplorable bloody outrages" and accused the United States and Israel of trying to exploit them to set the stage for an aggression against Libya.
On December 29, in fact, the Israeli premier, Simon Peres, denounced Libya as the "world center terrorism." On January 7, 1986,
THE ADMINISTRATION of US President Ronald Reagan justified its attacks on Tripoli and Bengazi in the name of "legitimate defence"
and US security. Terrorism was presented as the sole motive for this military operation. In reality, this was only an alibi.
For several years, Washington has been considering the possibility of overthrowing the Moamer Qadhafi regime for reasons that have nothing to do with terrorism.
CLAUDE GABRIEL
Whatever assessment one makes of Tripoli's international policy, there is no doubt that it is a thorn in the side of imperialism.
The
Libyan has taken a strongly government anti-American attitude and used its financial aid resources to various groups, movements or organizations.
Today,
Washington is attacking a
Libyan regime that irritates it. But in this way it is aiming to change the climate on a world scale. It wants to accustom the European and North American peoples to a reestablishing
States in its role as a world cop
On April 3, 1984, US Secretary of State George P. Shultz urged the
Western nations to defend themselves against terrorism, "which represents a new form of war ... a new kind of technique against which it will probably be necessary to devise techniques." *
On that occasion, the secretary of state pointed the finger of accusation at "countries such
Libya and North Korea." At the same time, he took the adding that there was no question of attacking headquarters or assassinating
Events in the Middle East, Chad and West Africa, as well as various incidents around some Libyan embassies abroad, have been used as arguments to pin blame on Qadhafi.
The
Gulf of Sidra affair was another means of pressing home the argument that the Tripoli government is an "outlaw"
regime.
first incident in the Gulf
The occurred in August 1981 when two
Libyan MiGs were shot down by US fighters. On June 29, 1983, two F-14's from the US 6th Fleet intercepted
International Viewpoint 5 May 1986 two Libyan MiG-23s about 35 miles off the coast of the country, in what the United States considers international airspace and the Libyans consider their territory. On August 1, 1983, there was another incident with a military incident in the Gulf of Sidra on March 24 when Libyan airplanes opened fire on American aircraft on maneuvers with the rest of the 6th Fleet. In reprisal, the US planes bombed a missile base on Libyan territory and attacked two Libyan navy patrol boats.
For a long time Reagan had been looking for this alibi to justify an attack and raise the question directly of overthrowing Qadhafi. government has openly avowed that its objective was to destabilize this regime and bring it down.
The Washington Post of November 3, 1985, cited to support the statement that Reagan had authorized the CIA to set up an designed to weaken the government, which is itself an expert in the field, used the argument of terrorism, in particular after the attacks on the ticket coun ters of the Israeli airline El Al in hysteria reached new heights.
For their part, the Libyans swung back and forth visibly between provocation and appeasement. On December 27, the Libyan press agency Jana described the Rome and attacks as "a heroic operation carried out by the sons of the martyrs of the Sabra and Shatila camps."
But on January 2, in a letter addressed to the UN
Reagan declared that he had proof that the Libyans were involved in the Rome and Vienna attacks and that the United States had decided to break off diplomatic relations with Libya and withdraw American personnel working in the country. бр ро на поліу, After that, the immense imperialist propaganda machine began to roll to justify exactly the sort of operation that finally took place a couple of weeks ago. The bombing in Berlin of a discotheque frequented by Americans was the final pretext that the US government was so obviously waiting for. Thatcher declares bombing "legitimate defenre"
In the name of protecting Amerithe bombing of Libya could now be justified. In granting the right to use US bases in Britain for the raid against Libya, Thatcher, Reagan's accomplice, declared that the action represented
The cost of exercising this "right"
and wounded among the population of Tripoli and Bengazi. It was a "right" that Reagan and Thatcher dreamed up to meet the needs of the moment, a sort of vendetta against a people.
After the bombing, the Libyans announced that there was a state of war in the Mediterranean. They fired two missiles at the Italian island of Lampedusa, where there are major US electronic installations. According decisive role in coordinating the bombfrom Britain with those that took off from the aircraft carriers to hit Tripoli and Bengazi."
This was a pathetic gesture. The two missiles fell into the sea two because they did not have the necessary range. In this way, it was demonstrated that the arms the Libyans have bought from the Soviets are far from capable of threatening southern Europe. The so-called mili* All quotes originally in English are retranslated from the French.
3
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
shooting at?
danger tary announced on
"suspending the
France, timidity."
But, with many building projects.
the
Western and thereby leadership forcing
Libya in battle out this plague."
to line force the up operation such vantage. It puts the European governments on the spot, foreing them to their position. It also sets clarify motion a very complex play of in links and military constraints tying together the Western powers.
The press, especially the French press, is trying to contrast Reagan's firmness with the "softness"
of most of the European governments. The population is thus being led to interpret world policy in terms of the psychology and temperament of the rulers. Nonetheless, in this affair, we see again the eternal debate in the bourgeoisie when it finds itself confronted major external dangers.
Each thinks that they are best defending the long-term interests of imperialism. But in es generally te interests.
The Libyan test does not concern only policy in the Mediterranean. It serves for all regions in the world where the imperialist positions are threatened, and first of all for Central America. From this standpoint, the bombing of the Libyan cities prepared the way against any House does not like.
But fortunately, the demonstrations that have taken place in Europe against the US aggression in Libya have not all been small and symbolic. They have shown in Italy, Britain, West Germany and Spain that there is a real movement of resistance to Reagan's big maneuvers.
The press has referred a lot to Qadhafi's "madness," or the irrationality of Libyan policy. In the anti-imperialist movement as well, there may be a tendency to think that Reagan is an unthinking and irresponsible war maker. It would be a grave error to see a confrontation of two kinds of "madness" or "megalomania."
Reagan is pursuing a policy that suits the interests of certain dominant American interests and lobbies. Qadhafi reflects the needs and the rule of the dominant social layers in Libya today.
Libya enjoyed exceptionally favorable conditions during the years of the oil boom. The social effects of the overthrow of the monarchy in 1969 and the political character of the ruling team that took over then have led to a redistribution of income of a sort seen nowhere else in the present regime a solid social base.
The ideology of the regime presses this sort of Bonapartism and the perspective of building a society where classes will disappear through a fair redistribution of the wealth. This "mass system" is represented as one based on the workers associated in production and not wage earners, and on the principles of association assuring the satisfaction of The land is presented as belonging to all, and no one is supposed to possess more than they consume. (1)
This beautiful construction which obviously is reminiscent of aspirations of socialism, is largely rhetoric. The Revolutionary Commitdo not represent self-organization of the working people. On the contrary, they tend to put them under tutelage in the name of "defending
According to the Libyan news agency Jana on November 17, 1985, "the revolutionary forces" destroyed the headquarters of the Registry in Tripoli and burned all the files. "This initiative, the agency said, "by the revolutionary forces in Tripoli fits into the framework of reinforeing the freedom of citizens and achieving the vanguard ideals of . the Green Book, according to which houses belong to those who live in them and the land belongs to no one. .. Thus, the revolu tionary forces have destroyed forever the documents that legitimized exploitation and laid unshakable foundations for the people's taking control of their heritage and their future.
International Viewpoint 5 May 1986
the revolution" against all sorts of a reminder of the impossibility of such
"saboteurs."
projects regime. into upping the ante in its
At the start of the 1980s, Libya imperialism in of
20,000 million confrontation had a bonanza justify its legitimacy and dollars in oil income for a populamaintain its social base in Libya tion of around 3 million. When this dropped abruptly in 1981, income radicalized its policy the regime while toward the Libyan society,
Libya is experiencing today at the same time reducing its own poses the question of the legitimacy spending.
of the regime, inasmuch as the latter that time, a sort of "ultrabased itself entirely on the oil bonanza
At leftism"
typical of petty-bourgeois to raise the incomes of a large perleaderships appeared.
It nationalist centage of Libyans.
"people's discipwas first of all the
The United States knows perfectly line well, therefore, of destabilizing this regime is favored today by the situation of the oil nation.
small
Qadhafi
Libyan economy hit by and falling oil prices pastry-making.
was
Janudictions.
alter Libyan society possible to profoundly. It opened the way for building projects on the scale of the
Egyptian pharaohs. Nonetheless, the dropping of the oil price below 15 during
- despite dumpdollars a barrel
1982, barrel was only the free market - greatly ing on reduced Libya's income, as well as that of all countries dependent on oil
The great hope of a "mass society"
is fading. The imperialists' regaining their grip on the oil market, followed had exported, the by the collapse of the oil price, are putting a sharp rein on the utopian pretences of the Libyan regime.
In the case of the oil market at
The least, the imperialist policy shows the theories that claim that countries to can take advantage of opportunities offered by the market to increase their independence within the world policy of the big industrial countries
(9,250 million blocks any such possibilities.
The big building projects and sales of technology made possible by the recycling of petrodollars did up juicy markets for the Western and to offer bourgeoisies in Libya and the other some others are now finding out the limits of this coexistence. It is in fact one thing to negotiate a contract on equal terms with an Italian enterprise or an American company, and worth it is quite another to think that a of Libyan oil, exports to perfectly regulated world market in the long run will permit a sort of vanguard experiment in building an ideal society based on the laws the capitalist market.
The present oil crisis has served as
International Viewpoint 5 May 1986
1981,
Reagan
Despite ups better was alist countries.
5,000
1,200 French.
withstanding,
However, political
The
Arab production, as
1974.
Reagan
These have their able to use sions.
position of means to megalomania
1984), for five relations price after oil reduced were so a decline in therefore, that of rallyabout were able political and their between it is not the
LIBYA in the Third World is destabilizing these societies and aggravating social tensions.
US policy today reflects a great fear of seeing a multiplication revolutionary focusses or crises. The attitude Washington took toward Haiti and its last-minute turn on the Philippines show that it wants neither
Nicaragua another nor another
Lebanon.
For this reason, pinpoint inter-
PRIL ACTIONS ventions such as the one carried out against Libya are a way of blackthe peoples of the Third mailing
Aar. 19-22. 190 oppose Apartei
World who want to free themselves.
Operations of this type - brief, spectacular, without risks - can test eep Us. Intervention in the conditions for a more prolonged
Central Americal against a people intervention disinclined to accept the rules of the game.
What can a state like Libya do against an armada like the US 6th
Fleet in the Mediterranean? The cost of a real counteroffensive is beyond
April 20, 1985: Americans protest against Reagan's policies (DR)
its reach. Only genuine revolutións can hope to be able to defend themselves and win. But for them also, as we have seen in Indochina and