by Prof Michel Chossudovsky
from
GlobalResearch Website
Part I
Insurrection and Military Intervention
The U.S.-NATO Attempted Coup d'Etat in Libya?
March 7, 2011
The U.S. and NATO are supporting an armed
insurrection in Eastern Libya, with a view to justifying a "humanitarian
intervention".
This is not a non-violent protest movement as in Egypt and Tunisia.
Conditions in Libya are fundamentally different. The armed insurgency in
Eastern Libya is directly supported by foreign powers.
The insurrection in
Benghazi immediately hoisted the red, black and green banner with the
crescent and star:
the flag of the monarchy of King Idris, which symbolized
the rule of the former colonial powers.
(See Manlio Dinucci,
Libya-When
historical memory is erased, Global Research, Febraury 28, 2011)
U.S. and NATO military advisers and special forces are already on the ground.
The operation was planned to coincide with the protest movement in
neighboring Arab countries.
Public opinion was led to believe that the
protest movement had spread spontaneously from Tunisia and Egypt to Libya.
The
Obama administration in consultation with its allies is assisting an
armed rebellion, namely an attempted coup d'Etat:
"The Obama administration stands ready to offer "any type of assistance" to
Libyans seeking to oust Moammar Gadhafi, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
said [February 27] "we've been reaching out to many different Libyans who
are attempting to organize in the east and as the revolution moves westward
there as well".
"I think it's way too soon to tell how this is
going to play out, but we're going to be ready and prepared to offer any
kind of assistance that anyone wishes to have from the United States."
Efforts are under way to form a provisional government in the eastern part
of the country where the rebellion began at midmonth.
"The U.S.," Clinton said, "is threatening more measures against Gadhafi's
government," but did not say what they were or when they might be announced.
The U.S. should,
"recognize some provisional government that they are trying
to set already up..."
[McCain]
Lieberman spoke in similar terms, urging,
"tangible support, (a) no-fly zone,
recognition of the revolutionary government, the citizens' government and
support for them with both humanitarian assistance and I would provide them
with arms."
(Clinton:
U.S. ready to aid to Libyan opposition - Associated, Press, February
27, 2011)
The Planned Invasion
A military intervention is now contemplated by U.S. NATO forces under a
"humanitarian mandate".
"The United States is moving naval and air forces in the region" to
"prepare the full range of options" in the confrontation with Libya:
Pentagon spokesperson Col. Dave Lapan of the Marines made this announcement
[March 1].
He then said that "It was President Obama who asked the military
to prepare for these options," because the situation in Libya is getting
worse."
(Manlio Dinucci,
Preparing for "Operation Libya": The Pentagon is
"Repositioning" its Naval and Air Forces..., Global Research,
March 3, 2011)
The real objective of "Operation Libya" is not to establish democracy but to,
-
take possession of Libya's oil reserves
-
destabilize the National Oil
Corporation (NOC)
-
eventually privatize the country's oil industry,
namely transfer the control and ownership of Libya's oil wealth into foreign
hands
The National Oil Corporation (NOC) is ranked 25 among the world’s Top
100 Oil Companies. (The Energy Intelligence ranks NOC 25 among the world’s
Top 100 companies - Libyaonline.com)
Libya is among the World's largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of
global oil reserves, more than twice those of the U.S.. (for further details
see Part II below)
The planned invasion of Libya, which is already underway is part of the
broader "Battle for Oil". Close to 80 percent of Libya’s oil reserves are
located in the Sirte Gulf basin of Eastern Libya. (See map below)
The strategic assumptions behind "Operation Libya" are reminiscent of
previous U.S.-NATO military undertakings in Yugoslavia and Iraq.
In Yugoslavia, U.S.-NATO forces triggered a civil war. The objective was to
create political and ethnic divisions, which eventually led to the break up
of an entire country. This objective was achieved through the covert funding
and training of armed paramilitary armies, first in Bosnia (Bosnian Muslim
Army, 1991-95) and subsequently in Kosovo (Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA),
1998-1999).
In both Kosovo and Bosnia, media disinformation (including
outright lies and fabrications) were used to support U.S.-EU claims that the
Belgrade government had committed atrocities, thereby justifying a military
intervention on humanitarian grounds.
Ironically, "Operation Yugoslavia" is now on the lips of U.S. foreign policy
makers: Senator Lieberman has "likened the situation in Libya" to the
events in the Balkans in the 1990s when he said the U.S.,
"intervened to stop a genocide against
Bosnians. And the first we did was to provide them the arms to defend
themselves. That's what I think we ought to do in Libya."
(Clinton:
U.S. ready to aid to Libyan opposition - Associated, Press,
February 27, 2011)
The strategic scenario would be to push towards the formation and
recognition of an interim government of the secessionist province, with a
view to eventually breaking up the country.
This option is already underway. The invasion of Libya has already
commenced.
"Hundreds of U.S., British and French military advisers have arrived in
Cyrenaica, Libya's eastern breakaway province... The advisers, including
intelligence officers, were dropped from warships and missile boats at the
coastal towns of Benghazi and Tobruk".
(DEBKAfile,
U.S. military advisers in
Cyrenaica, February 25, 2011)
U.S. and allied special forces are on the ground in Eastern Libya, providing
covert support to the rebels This was recognized when British SAS Special
Forces commandos were arrested in the Benghazi region.
They were acting as
military advisers to opposition forces:
"Eight British special forces commandos, on a secret mission to put British
diplomats in touch with leading opponents of Col Muammar Gadaffi in Libya,
ended in humiliation after they were held by rebel forces in eastern Libya,
The Sunday Times reported today.
The men, armed but in plain clothes, claimed they were there to check the
opposition's needs and offer help."
(Top UK commandos captured by rebel
forces in Libya: Report, Indian Express, March 6, 2011)
The SAS forces were arrested while escorting a British "diplomatic mission"
which entered the country illegally (no doubt from a British warship) for
discussions with leaders of the rebellion.
The British foreign office has
acknowledged that,
"a small British diplomatic team [had been] sent to
eastern Libya to initiate contacts with the rebel-backed opposition".
U.K.
diplomatic team leaves Libya - World - CBC News, March 6, 2011
Ironically, the reports not only confirm Western military intervention
(including several hundred special forces), they also acknowledge that the
rebellion was firmly opposed to the illegal presence of foreign troops on
Libyan soil:
"The SAS's intervention angered Libyan opposition figures who ordered the
soldiers to be locked up on a military base. Gadaffi's opponents fear he
could use any evidence of western military interference to rally patriotic
support for his regime."
(Reuters, March 6, 2011)
The captured British "diplomat" with seven special forces soldiers was a
member of British Intelligence, an MI6 agent on a "secret mission". (The
Sun, March 7, 2011)
Confirmed by U.S. NATO statements, weapons are being supplied to opposition
forces. There are indications although no clear evidence so far that weapons
were delivered to the insurgents prior to the onslaught of the rebellion. In
all likelihood, U.S. NATO military and intelligence advisers were also on the
ground prior to the insurgency.
This was the pattern applied in Kosovo:
special forces supporting and training the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in
the months prior to the 1999 bombing campaign and invasion of Yugoslavia.
As events unfold, however, Libyan government forces have regained control
over rebel positions:
"The big offensive pro-Qaddafi forces launched [March 4] to wrest from rebel
hands control of Libya's most important towns and oil centers resulted
[March 5] in the recapture of the key town of Zawiya and most of the oil
towns around the Gulf of Sirte.
In Washington and London, talk of military
intervention on the side of the Libyan opposition was muted by the
realization that field intelligence on both sides of the Libyan conflict was
too sketchy to serve as a basis for decision-making."
(Debkafile,
Qaddafi
pushes rebels back. Obama names Libya intel panel, March 5, 2011)
The opposition movement is firmly divided regarding the issue of foreign
intervention.
The division is between the grassroots movement on the one hand and the U.S.
supported "leaders" of the armed insurrection who favor foreign military
intervention on "humanitarian grounds".
The majority of the Libyan population, both the supporters and opponents of
the regime, are firmly opposed to any form of outside intervention.
Media Disinformation
The broad strategic objectives underlying the proposed invasion are not
mentioned by the media.
Following a
deceitful media campaign, where news was
literally fabricated without reporting on what was actually happening on the
ground, a large sector of international public opinion has granted its
unbending support to foreign intervention, on humanitarian grounds.
The invasion is on the Pentagon's drawing board.
It is slated to be carried
out irrespective of the demands of the people of Libya including the
opponents of the regime, who have voiced their aversion to foreign military
intervention in derogation of the nation's sovereignty.
Naval and Air Force
Deployment
Were this military intervention to be carried out it would result in an all
out war, a blitzkrieg, implying the bombing of military as well as civilian
targets.
In this regard, General James Mattis, Commander of U.S. Central Command, (USCENTCOM),
has intimated that the establishment of a "no fly zone" would de facto
involve an all out bombing campaign, targeting inter alia Libya's air
defense system:
‘It would be a military operation - it wouldn’t be just telling people not
to fly airplanes. 'You would have to remove air defence capability in order
to establish a no-fly zone, so no illusions here.'
(U.S. general warns
no-fly zone could lead to all-out war in Libya, Mail Online, March 5, 2011).
A massive U.S. and allied naval power has been deployed along the Libyan
coastline.
The Pentagon is moving its warships to the Mediterranean. Aircraft carrier
USS Enterprise had transited through the Suez Canal within a few days
following the insurrection. (http://www.enterprise.navy.mil)
U.S. amphibious warships, USS Ponce and USS Kearsarge, have also been
deployed in the Mediterranean.
USS Enterprise transits the Suez Canal in Egypt
February 15, 2011, handout
photo, U.S. Navy
400 U.S. Marines have been dispatched to the Greek Island of Crete,
"ahead of
their deployment on warships off Libya".
("Operation Libya":
U.S. Marines on
Crete for Libyan deployment, times of Malta, March 3, 2011)
Meanwhile Germany, France, Britain, Canada and Italy are in the process of
deploying war vessels along the Libyan coast.
Germany has deployed three war ships using the pretext of assisting in the
evacuation of refugees on the Libya-Tunisia border.
"France has decided to
send the Mistral, its helicopter-carrier, which, according to the Defense
Ministry will contribute to evacuation of thousands of Egyptians."
(Towards
the Coasts of Libya: U.S., French and British Warships Enter the
Mediterranean, Agenzia Giornalistica Italia, March 3, 2011)
Canada has
dispatch (March 2) Navy Frigate HMCS Charlottetown.
Meanwhile, U.S. 17th Air Force, named U.S. Air Force Africa based at Ramstein
Air Force Base in Germany is assisting in evacuation of refugees. U.S.-NATO
air force facilities in Britain, Italy, France and the Middle East are on
standby.
Part 2
The Battle for Oil
Redrawing The Map of Africa
March 9, 2011
The geopolitical and economic implications of a
U.S.-NATO led military intervention directed against Libya are far-reaching.
Libya is among the World's largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of
global oil reserves, more than twice those of the U.S..
"Operation Libya" is part of the broader military agenda in the Middle East
and Central Asia which consists in gaining control and corporate ownership
over more than sixty percent of the world's reserves of oil and natural gas,
including oil and gas pipeline routes.
"Muslim countries including Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait, the United
Arab Emirates, Qatar, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Nigeria, Algeria, Kazakhstan,
Azerbaijan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, possess between 66.2 and 75.9
percent of total oil reserves, depending on the source and methodology of
the estimate."
(See Michel Chossudovsky,
The "Demonization" of Muslims and the Battle for
Oil, Global Research, January 4, 2007)
With 46.5 billion barrels of proven reserves, (10 times those of Egypt),
Libya is the largest oil economy in the African continent followed by
Nigeria and Algeria (Oil and Gas Journal).
In contrast,
U.S. proven oil
reserves are of the order of 20.6 billion barrels (December 2008) according
to the Energy Information Administration.
(U.S. Crude Oil, Natural Gas, and
Natural Gas Liquids Reserves)
Note
The most recent estimates place Libya's oil reserves at 60 billion barrels.
Its gas reserves at 1,500 billion m3. Its production has been between 1.3
and 1.7 million barrels a day, well below its productive capacity.
Its
longer term objective is three million b/d and a gas production of 2,600
million cubic feet a day, according to figures of the National Oil
Corporation (NOC).
The (alternative) BP Statistical Energy Survey (2008) places Libya's proven
oil reserves at 41.464 billion barrels at the end of 2007 which represents
3.34 % of the world's proven reserves. (Mbendi -
Oil and Gas in Libya -
Overview).
Oil is the "Trophy" of
U.S.-NATO led Wars
An invasion of Libya under a humanitarian mandate would serve the same
corporate interests as the 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq.
The
underlying objective is to take possession of Libya's oil reserves,
destabilize the National Oil Corporation (NOC) and eventually privatize the
country's oil industry, namely transfer the control and ownership of Libya's
oil wealth into foreign hands.
The National Oil Corporation (NOC) is ranked 25 among the world’s Top 100
Oil Companies. (The Energy Intelligence ranks NOC 25 among the world’s Top
100 companies - Libyaonline.com)
The planned invasion of Libya, which is already underway is part of the
broader "Battle for Oil". Close to 80 percent of Libya’s oil reserves are
located in the Sirte Gulf basin of Eastern Libya. (See map below)
Libya is a Prize Economy.
"War is good for business".
Oil is the trophy of
U.S.-NATO led wars.
Wall Street, the Anglo-American oil giants, the U.S.-EU weapons producers
would be the unspoken beneficiaries of a U.S.-NATO led military campaign
directed against Libya.
Libyan oil is a bonanza for the Anglo-American oil giants. While the market
value of crude oil is currently well in excess of 100 dollars a barrel, the
cost of Libyan oil is extremely low, as low as $1.00 a barrel (according to
one estimate).
As one oil market expert commented somewhat cryptically:
"At $110 on the world market, the simple math gives Libya a $109 profit
margin."
(Libya Oil One Country's $109 Profit on $110 Oil, EnergyandCapital.com March 12, 2008)
Foreign Oil Interests
in Libya
Foreign oil companies operating prior to the insurrection in Libya include,
Of significance, China plays a central role in the Libyan oil industry. The
China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) had a workforce of some 400 employees.
The total Chinese workforce in Libya was of the order of 30,000.
Eleven percent (11%) of Libyan oil exports are channeled to China. While
there are no figures on the size and importance of CNPC's production and
exploration activities, there are indications that they are sizeable.
More generally, China's presence in North Africa is considered by Washington
to constitute an intrusion. From a geopolitical standpoint, China is an
encroachment. The military campaign directed against Libya is intent upon
excluding China from North Africa.
Also of importance is the role of Italy. ENI, the Italian oil consortium
puts out 244,000 barrels of gas and oil, which represents almost 25 percent
of Libya's total exports. (Sky News -
Foreign oil firms halt Libyan
operations, February 23, 2011).
Among U.S. companies in Libya, Chevron and Occidental Petroleum (Oxy) decided
barely 6 months ago (October 2010) not to renew their oil and gas
exploration licenses in Libya. (Why are Chevron and Oxy leaving Libya?
- Voice of Russia, October 6, 2010).
In contrast, in November 2010, Germany's
oil company, RW DIA E signed a far-reaching agreement with Libya's
National Oil Corporation (NOC) involving exploration and production sharing.
(AfricaNews -
Libya: German oil firm signs prospecting deal - The AfricaNews)
The financial stakes as well as "the spoils of war" are extremely high. The
military operation is intent upon dismantling Libya's financial institutions
as well as confiscating billions of dollars of Libyan financial assets
deposited in Western banks.
It should be emphasized that Libya's military capabilities, including its
air defense system are weak.
Libya Oil Concessions
Redrawing the Map of
Africa
Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa.
The objective of U.S.-NATO
interference is strategic:
it consists in outright theft, in stealing the
nation's oil wealth under the disguise of a humanitarian intervention.
This
military operation is intent upon establishing
U.S. hegemony in North
Africa, a region historically dominated by France and to lesser extent by
Italy and Spain.
With regard to Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria, Washington's design is to
weaken the political links of these countries to France and push for the
installation of new political regimes which have a close rapport with the
U.S.. This weakening of France is part of a U.S. imperial design. It is a
historical process which goes back to the wars in Indochina.
U.S.-NATO intervention leading to the eventual formation of a U.S. puppet regime
is also intent upon excluding China from the region and edging out China's
National Petroleum Corp (CNPC). The Anglo-American oil giants including
British Petroleum which signed an exploration contract in 2007 with the
Ghadaffi government are among the potential "beneficiaries" of the proposed
U.S.-NATO military operation.
More generally, what is at stake is the redrawing of the map of Africa, a
process of neo-colonial re-division, the scrapping of the demarcations of the
1884 Berlin Conference, the conquest of Africa by the United States in
alliance with Britain, in a U.S.-NATO led operation.
The colonial re-division of Africa. 1913
Libya - Strategic
Saharan Gateway to Central Africa
Libya has borders with several countries which are within France's sphere of
influence, including Algeria, Tunisia, Niger and Chad.
Chad is potentially an oil rich economy. ExxonMobil and Chevron have
interests in Southern Chad including a pipeline project. Southern Chad is a
gateway into the Darfur region of Sudan, which is also strategic in view of
its oil wealth.
China has oil interests in both Chad and Sudan. The China National Petroleum
Corp (CNPC) signed a far-reaching agreement with the Chad government in 2007.
Niger is strategic to the United States in view of its extensive reserves of
uranium. At present, France dominates the uranium industry in Niger through
the French nuclear conglomerate
Areva, formerly known as Cogema. China also
has a stake in Niger's uranium industry.
More generally, the Southern border of Libya is strategic for the United
States in its quest to extend its sphere of influence in Francophone Africa,
a vast territory extending from North Africa to Central and Western Africa.
Historically this region was part of France and Belgium's colonial empires,
the borders of which were established at the
Berlin Conference of 1884.
Source
www.hobotraveler.com
The U.S. played a passive role at the 1884 Berlin Conference.
This new 21st Century re-division of the African continent, predicated on the control over
oil, natural gas and strategic minerals (cobalt, uranium, chromium,
manganese, platinum and uranium) largely supports dominant Anglo-American
corporate interests.
U.S. interference in North Africa redefines the geopolitics of an entire
region. It undermines China and overshadows the influence of the European
Union.
This new re-division of Africa not only weakens the role of the former
colonial powers (including France and Italy) in North Africa. it is also
part of a broader process of displacing and weakening France (and Belgium)
over a large part of the African continent.
U.S. puppet regimes have been installed in several African countries which
historically were in the sphere of influence of France (and Belgium),
including The Republic of the Congo and Rwanda. Several countries in West
Africa (including Côte d'Ivoire) are slated to become U.S. proxy states.
The European Union is heavily dependent on the flow of Libyan oil. 85
percent of its oil is sold to European countries.
In the case of a war with
Libya, the supply of petroleum to Western Europe could be further disrupted,
largely affecting Italy, France and Germany. Thirty percent of Italy's oil
and 10 percent of its gas are imported from Libya. Libyan gas is fed through
the
Greenstream pipeline in the Mediterranean (See map below).
The implications of these potential disruptions are far-reaching.
They also
have a direct bearing on the relationship between the U.S. and the European
Union.
Greenstream pipeline linking Libya to Italy
Concluding Remarks
The mainstream media through massive disinformation is complicit in
justifying a military agenda which, if carried out, would have devastating
consequences not only for the Libyan people: the social and economic impacts
would be felt Worldwide.
There are at present three distinct war theaters in the broader Middle East
Central Asian region:
-
Palestine
-
Afghanistan
-
Iraq
In the case of an attack
on Libya, a fourth war theater would be opened up in North Africa, with the
risk of military escalation.
Public opinion must take cognizance of the hidden agenda behind this alleged
humanitarian undertaking, heralded by the heads of state and heads of
government of NATO countries as a "Just War". The Just War theory in both
its classical and contemporary versions upholds war as a "humanitarian
operation".
It calls for military intervention on ethical and moral grounds
against "rogue states" and "Islamic terrorists". The Just
War theory
demonizes the Gaddafi regime while providing a humanitarian mandate to
U.S.-NATO military intervention.
The heads of state and heads of government of NATO countries are the
architects of war and destruction in Iraq and Afghanistan. In an utterly
twisted logic, they are heralded as the voices of reason, as the
representatives of the "international community".
Realities are turned upside down. A humanitarian intervention is launched by
war criminals in high office, who are the unchallenged guardians of the Just
War theory.
Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo,... Civilian casualties in Pakistan resulting from
U.S.
drone attacks on towns and villages ordered by president Obama, are not
front page news, nor are the 2 million civilian deaths in Iraq.
There is no such thing as a "Just War". The history of U.S. imperialism should
be understood.
The 2000 Report of the Project of the New American Century
(PNAC)
entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses" calls for the implementation of a
long war, a war of conquest.
One of the main components of this military
agenda is:
to "Fight and decisively win in multiple, simultaneous theater
wars".
"Operation Libya" is part of that process. It is another theater in the
Pentagon's logic of "simultaneous theater wars".
The PNAC document faithfully reflects the evolution of U.S. military doctrine
since 2001. The U.S. plans to be involved simultaneously in several war
theaters in different regions of the World.
While protecting America, namely "National Security" of the United States of
America is upheld as an objective, the PNAC report does spell out why these
multiple theater wars are required. The humanitarian justification is not
mentioned.
What is the purpose of America's military roadmap?
Libya is targeted because it is one among several remaining countries
outside America's sphere of influence, which fail to conform to U.S. demands.
Libya is a country which has been selected as part of a military "road map"
which consists of "multiple simultaneous theater wars".
In the words of
former NATO Commander Chief General Wesley Clark:
"In the Pentagon in November 2001, one of
the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were
still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more.
This
was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and
there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria,
Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan..."
(Wesley Clark, Winning Modern Wars, p.
130)
Part 3
"Humanitarian Wars are Good for Business"
All Out War on Libya, Surge in the Price of Crude Oil
Speculators Applaud...
March 18, 2011
The establishment of a no fly zone is on the
drawing board of the Pentagon. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, supported
by the Arab League and the Organization for African Unity (OUA) have
labeled Libya as "An Unfriendly Nation".
The scenario envisaged by Washington is to involve Saudi Arabia and the Gulf
states in aerial attacks directed against Libya.
They have also called on Saudi Arabia to supply opposition forces with
weapons.
Reports confirm that NATO special forces and military advisers to the
rebellion are on the ground in Eastern Libya.
The geopolitical and economic implications of a
U.S.-NATO led military
intervention directed against Libya are far-reaching.
Libya is among the World's largest oil economies with approximately 3.5% of
global oil reserves, more than twice those of the U.S.
A war on Libya would have an immediate impact on the price of crude oil. The
latter has risen by 18 percent since the beginning of the insurrection in
Libya.
It currently stands at $104.42 a barrel for April delivery on the New York
Mercantile Exchange, its highest level since the financial crash of
September 2008.
Since August 2010, the price of crude oil has risen from
75.93 a barrel to 104.42 (March 2011), a hefty increase of 37.5 percent.
(See Table below)
Crude Oil (petroleum) - Monthly Price - Commodity Prices
| |
|
Month |
Value |
|
Aug-10 |
75.93 |
|
Sep-10 |
76.14 |
|
Oct-10 |
81.72 |
|
Nov-10 |
84.56 |
|
Dec-10 |
90.1 |
|
Jan-11 |
92.66 |
|
March 2011 Price for April Delivery 104. 42
Source indexmundi.com.
Crude Oil (petroleum) - Monthly Price - Commodity
Prices
A war directed against Libya would push the price of crude oil up to
abysmally high levels, potentially triggering a global inflationary spiral,
which would result in the impoverishment of large sectors of the World
population.
A sizeable increase in the price of oil over a prolonged period would wreak
economic havoc:
production and transportation costs would increase
dramatically. Hikes in the costs of fuel and energy would trigger a renewed
string of bankruptcies in major sectors of economic activity. They would
also contribute to a sizeable increase in the external debt of developing
countries.
These price hikes, which are already ongoing, would occur despite the
abysmally low costs of Middle East oil.
What this means is that powerful institutional speculators on Wall Street
with links to the U.S. military and intelligence establishment will cash in on
billions of dollars in speculative gains not only in the oil market but also
in the commodity and foreign exchange markets.
This money is appropriated from households which must now pay a higher price
for fuel.
A "humanitarian war" would be "good for business". It serves the interests
of the institutional speculators, it contributes to a further process of
appropriation of money wealth.
Financial institutions which had prior knowledge or intelligence of events
in Egypt and Libya have already made billions of dollars in speculative
gains in the futures and options markets for crude oil.
These global financial and banking institutions, which "placed their bets"
several months ago, have "a vested interest in war".
The greater the turmoil
and disruption of the crude oil market, the greater the speculative gains.
Short term speculative gains due to market volatility are also part of this
process. Foreknowledge of the sequence of political or military events and
how they affect markets as well as control and/or manipulation of financial
news pertaining to these events are an essential part of the betting
process.
In this regard we are dealing the with workings of the World's commodity
exchanges, the most important of which is the powerful CME Group created
following the merger of,
-
the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME)
-
the Chicago
Board of Trade (CBOT)
-
the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX)
Watch Prof. Chossudovsky's statement on GRTV:
Political Rumors and Fake Information
The spreading of rumors and fake information is also a profitable
undertaking particularly in relation to short-term movements of commodity
markets:
...a rumor that Libya's long-time ruler Muammar Gaddafi had been shot tore
across the commodities market, sending U.S. crude oil futures down more than
two percent. Other rumors have had similar immediate and sweeping effects,
even without real changes in actual oil production or reserves.
The cause is
oil speculators, such as hedge funds, who buy and sell commodities,
profiting by betting on short-term price changes.
These traders are making money on quick movement, wagering on rumors and
market blips.
They are buying and quickly re-selling commodities they have
no intention of actually holding or using. Their opportunism is once again
hitting working-class families across the country, increasing the burden on
small business owners and farmers...
(Rep. Joe Courtney:
Market
Speculators and the Real Cost of Oil, Huffington Post, March 16, 2011)
Economic Sanctions
Economic sanctions have been imposed by the U.S. on Libya thereby creating
havoc in the supply of Libyan oil to the European Union. These sanctions are
indirectly targeted at the European Union.
They contribute to weakening
Italy and France, which are heavily dependent on Libyan oil.
Libyan oil trade has virtually been
paralyzed as banks decline to clear
payments in dollars due to U.S. sanctions (Reuters, February 8, 2011).
"The
move follows a decision by major U.S. oil firms to halt trade with Libya and
makes it almost impossible for European firms to buy Libyan oil and supply
refineries in countries such as France and Italy."
Banks have been instructed [by Wall Street and Washington] to freeze
financial transactions:
"Banks don't want to finance the system in Libya, so
for the moment no one is getting money for oil. There are big problems for
payments," said a senior trader with a European oil company.
"It's not a matter of choice, there is an embargo on U.S. dollars coming in
and out of Libya," said a trader with one of the firms, referring to banks'
resistance to clear payments in the U.S. currency.
"All U.S. dollar transactions are being blocked," the trader said, adding it
was not clear at this stage if payments were possible in other currencies
and whether any Swiss or European banks were willing to conclude
transactions.
(Libyan oil trade
paralyzed, deals in dollars blocked
- Energy
& Oil - Reuters, 8 February 2011)
Economic Impacts of a U.S.-NATO Military Operation
If this military operation is carried out, oil prices will spiral,
contributing to further exacerbating the economic crisis with devastating
social consequences, particularly in the Europe Union, which is heavily
dependent on Libyan oil.
The hikes in oil prices contribute to increased poverty, they also
contribute to a concurrent increase in
global food prices (which are also the object of speculative
activity on the commodity exchanges) and more generally in the cost of
living Worldwide, i.e. the consumer price index.
|
Wheat
- Monthly Price - Commodity Prices
|
|
|
Month |
Value |
|
Aug-10 |
246.25 |
|
Sep-10 |
271.69 |
|
Oct-10 |
270.29 |
|
Nov-10 |
274.37 |
|
Dec-10 |
306.99 |
|
Jan-11 |
326.54 |
US$ per metric ton
|
Maize (corn) - Monthly Price
- Commodity Prices
|
|
Month |
Value |
|
Aug-10 |
175.6 |
|
Sep-10 |
205.84 |
|
Oct-10 |
235.7 |
|
Nov-10 |
236.44 |
|
Dec-10 |
251.02 |
|
Jan-11 |
265.29 |
US$ per metric ton
- Maize (corn), U.S. No. 2
Yellow, FOB Gulf of Mexico, U.S. price, US$ per metric ton.
- Wheat, No.1 Hard Red Winter, ordinary protein, FOB Gulf of Mexico,
US$ per metric ton.
-
Maize (corn) - Monthly Price - Commodity
Prices
-
Wheat - Monthly Price - Commodity Prices |
The fuel price hikes will in turn have a significant impact on the costs of
transportation, international freight and air travel. At the height of a
global economic crisis, it will further undermine both domestic and
international trade.
All this is known and understood by the major economic actors including the
politicians and the speculators. The politicians follow the guidelines set
by Wall Street, which largely call the shots on government financial policy.
Regulation of the price of food staples or the retail price of gasoline is
considered to be an encroachment on the workings of the "free market".
What we are dealing with is a corrupt economic system which feeds on war and
destruction.
The average price of gasoline at the pump in the U.S. is of the order of 3.80
a gallon, in excess of $4 a gallon in California.
The speculators applaud!
The media casually blames the price hikes on
Gaddafi...
"Households are cutting back on travel, cinema visits and
groceries in the UK, where prices jumped to 130.68 pence a liter ($8.06 a
gallon) on March 3, ... Prices set records in the Netherlands and Italy."
(Record Gas Prices: $8 In Europe, $4 In California; Trichet Could Raise
Interest Rates To Halt Inflation - Markets - Minyanville.com, March 4, 2011)
Average Gasoline Prices in the U.S. (U.S.$ per Gallon)
Source
Daily Fuel Gauge Report-national, state and local average prices for
gasoline, diesel and E-85.
(American Automobile Association, AAA )
States Map
Source AAA
