Digging the North African-Middle East Conflict

"I am a fighter, a revolutionary from tents ... I will die as a martyr at the end. Muammar Gaddafi is the leader of the revolution, I am not a president to step down ... This is my country. Muammar is not a president to leave his post."

Libyan Leader Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi

These were the strong words of Libyan revolutionary leader Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi dismissing calls for his ouster, after a series of demonstrations calling for his resignation broke out in Tripoli following protests over corruption, inflation, unemployment, human rights violation, police brutality and other forms of harassment. Days later, Libya has turned havoc. Armed rebel protesters occupied and took control of the southern cities of Libya. Actual arm battles are now taking place in major cities of Benghazi and Tripoli, the country’s capital.

“We will fight and beat them (protesters),” said Muammar al-Gaddafi vehemently. “A life without dignity is meaningless nor live without the green flag is also meaningless… America is not the international police of the world.” Muammar al-Gaddafi insinuating that the United States has had a hand over the widespread protests in the region, further referring to their long time alliance with the White House and the betrayal made by the US government to their cause to topple the Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin-Laden.

Egyptians rejoiced following the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak.

In barely over two or three months, the once seemingly-peaceful Arab countries of North Africa turned suddenly into a wide frontier of chaos and unrest. Violent and nonviolent resistance, demonstrations and self-immolations, and arm skirmishes filled these oil-laden oases of North Africa and part of the Middle East.

Self-immolation. Mohamed Bouazizi set
him self on fire. This act enraged the 
Tunisians and started the massive street
protests leading to the ouster of President 
Zine Ben Ali.

The revolutionary wave of demonstrations started just December of last year in Libya’s neighbor, Tunisia. The demonstrations were said to be precipitated by high unemployment, food inflation, corruption, a lack of freedom of speech and other political freedom and poor living conditions. The protests, which have resulted in scores of deaths and injuries—most of which were the result of action by police and security forces against demonstrators, were sparked by the self-immolation of a certain Mohamed Bouazizi in December and led instantly to the ousting of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali days later, when he officially resigned after fleeing to Saudi Arabia, ending 23 long years in power. Bouazizi, was a Tunisian street vendor who set himself on fire in protest of the confiscation of his wares and the harassment and humiliation that was allegedly inflicted on him by a municipal official and her aides.

The success of Tunisian protests, dubbed as the Jasmine Revolution, inspired similar actions throughout the Arab world, including several men who emulated Bouazizi's act, in an attempt to bring an end to autocratic governments; the Egyptian revolution began after the events in Tunisia and also led to the ousting of Egypt's longtime president Hosni Mubarak; Around the same time, Jordan’s King Abdullah named a new prime minister and the president of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh, announced that he would not seek another term in office in 2013, after what would then be 35 years of rule.

During the ongoing uprising against Libyan strongman Gadaffi , Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir announced he would not seek re-election in 2015. Despite Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announcing he would not seek re-election in 2014, increasingly violent demonstrations urging him to resign have mounted; furthermore, protests have also taken place in Algeria, Bahrain, Pakistan, Mauritania, and elsewhere in the wider North Africa and Middle East.

North Africa and Middle East countries rising against the leaders. (Countries presently disturbed by massive demonstrations are lightly-shaded)

Then we asked, what happened? Did the Arab rulers not able to see this happening? Did the protests come with spontaneity? I believe and many other political analysts believe that through centuries the Arabs have not developed a trait such as to rise civilly against their well-respected rulers unless there have been constant prodding and stimulations clandestinely manipulated by outside forces. And who else have the power to orchestrate such extensive, devious manoeuvre? The Libyan ruler could be correct in his observations. They (with the US) may have, indeed, been into a pact caused to bring down the assumed world villain in the person of Osama Bin-Laden. But such concord may bear the US’ scheme to penetrate the country, his government and later sow the seeds of insurgence against the internationally-acclaimed leader of the Libyan Revolution.

Indeed, Gaddafi has a right to point his fingers at the Superpower. For who else could do more? It must be remembered that at the twilight of the Iraq invasion by US forces and its allies, the US government, speaking thru its former National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, promised to clean the Middle East and provide a greater economic-friendly landscape much less a supposed US-controlled economic climate in the region.

Sec. Condoleezza Rice

"Today, along with many allies, we are helping the people of Iraq and Afghanistan to build free societies. And we are working with the people of the Middle East to spread the blessings of liberty and democracy as the alternatives to instability, hatred, and terror. This work is hard and dangerous, yet it is worthy of our effort and our sacrifice. The defeat of terror and the success of freedom in those nations will serve the interests of our Nation and inspire hope and encourage reform throughout the greater Middle East."

These were the exact words of Dr. Rice speaking before the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States. Unconsciously, Secretary Rice had slipped a hint on a Top Secret Middle East agenda of the US government. The analysis of Gaddafi would, perhaps, not be far from the truth, for US policy has always been trenchant deep into national policies of several natural-resource-rich states. No further proof could be acquired to cement the conclusions of Gaddafi and other geo-political analysts, but the events of the past would not deny the fact that the US has polished the art of backdoor assault by taking part in local insurgencies, impregnating would-be oppositions with half-truthful information which they could use against their governments, and perhaps, financing and rewarding opposition leaders in their cause against the sitting government.

This has always been in the US agenda since the failed invasion of Iraq in 1991. Have we already forgotten the successes of the Colour Revolutions in Mid-East Europe? The movements which had used nonviolent resistance as a potent arm against their governments. The movements which cracked the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS, formerly USSR) and other Balkan states in early 2000’s. These movements had been successful in Serbia (especially the Bulldozer Revolution of 2000), in Georgia's Rose Revolution (2003), in Ukraine's Orange Revolution (2004), in Lebanon's Cedar Revolution and (though more violent than the previous ones) in Kyrgyzstan's Tulip Revolution (2005), in Kuwait's Blue Revolution (2005), in Iraq's Purple Revolution (2005), in Czechoslovakia's Velvet Revolution (1989), in Iran's Green Revolution (2009-2010) . Each time massive street protests followed disputed elections or request of fair elections and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian.

Otpor Logo

The nonviolent actions in Serbia which led to the ouster of deposed President Slobodan Milosevic could somehow be attributed to some US vicious plot to overthrow the Socialist regime. The silent uprising dubbed as the “Bulldozer Revolution” was led by a league of student protesters who gathered themselves into a movement called OTPOR. The group was said to have been guided by the theories on nonviolent actions of Gene Sharp of the University of Massachusetts Darmouth.

At the aftermath of the October 2000 victory, information started to appear during this time about substantial outside help, both in funds and logistics, to Serbia which Otpor received leading up to the revolution. A group of activists made one trip to Budapest in neighboring Hungary in June 2000 to attend a lecture by retired US Army Col. Robert Helvey, a colleague of Sharp, who was later portrayed as the "creator" of Otpor, although the movement had already reached its peak when the lecture took place. Otpor was also a recipient of substantial funds from U.S. government affiliated organizations such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), International Republican Institute (IRI) , and US Agency for International Development (USAID)

In a November 2000 article from the New York Times Magazine, American journalist Roger Cohen talked to various officials from the above organizations about the extent of American assistance received by Otpor. Paul B. McCarthy from the Washington-based NED stated that Otpor received the majority of US$3 million spent by NED in Serbia from September 1998 until October 2000. At the same time, McCarthy himself held a series of meetings with Otpor's leaders in Podgorica, as well as Szeged and Budapest.

The US government offering a huge reward for the capture of 
Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic and the top official of
his regime showed only how much  the US had been egg-
ing and intruding into Serbia's national policy. 

Just how much of the US$25 million, appropriated in the year 2000 by USAID, for the purposes of bringing down Milošević, went to Otpor is not clear. Donald L. Pressley, the assistant administrator at USAID said that several hundred thousand dollars were given to Otpor directly for "demonstration-support material, like T-shirts and stickers". Otpor leaders intimated they also received a lot of covert aid—a subject on which there was no comment in Washington. Albert Cevallos of the USIP has written a paper about how his organisation supported Otpor.

Daniel Calingaert, an official with IRI, said Otpor received some of the US$1.8 million his institute spent in the country throughout 2000. He also said he met Otpor leaders "seven to ten times" in Montenegro (then Yugoslavia), and Hungary, beginning in October 1999. These events undoubtedly showed some US involvement in the overthrow of the Socialist Government of Milosevic.

Georgia’s Rose Revolution which led to the forced resignation of President Edward Shevardnadze in November 2003 was undermined by the youth movement called KMARA (Enough!). As expected, the US had a hot hand over the movement offering and extending financial support and key trainings through the Freedom House, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), USAID, National Democratic Institute, European Union, National Endowment for Democracy, International Republican Institute, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, USAID—all are US funded and organized agencies, although a huge part of the financial support also came from Hungarian-American billionaire financier George Soros.

The Rose Revolution of Georgia.

The same thing happened during Ukraine’s Orange Revolution. Many analysts believed the Orange Revolution was built on a pattern first developed in the ousting of Slobodan Milošević in Serbia four years earlier, and continuing with the Rose Revolution in Georgia. Each of these victories, though apparently spontaneous, was the result of extensive grassroots campaigning and coalition-building among the opposition. Each included election victories followed up by public demonstrations, after attempts by the incumbent to hold onto power through electoral fraud.

Ukraine's Orange Revolution.

Each of these social movements included extensive work by student activists. Otpor in Serbia, Kmara in Georgia, in Ukraine the movement has worked under the succinct slogan PORA ("It's Time"). Activists in each of these movements were funded and trained in tactics of political organization and nonviolent resistance by a coalition of Western pollsters and professional consultants funded by a range of Western government and non-government agencies. And these include the U.S. State Department and USAID along with the NED, IRI and the Freedom House. Again, writings on nonviolent struggles by Gene Sharp formed the strategic basis of the student campaigns.

The Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan.

Same is to be said of the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan. The youth group named Kelkel, which was patterned to and had some close connections with Otpor, Kmara and Pora, has also been in the forefront of the ouster of President Askar Akayev and his government in 2005.

Apparently, the US government has been all over Europe and now permeating throughout Africa and Asia. Do we need to argue about Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and other Asian conflicts, in terms of US’ involvement? The US is deceptively towering over the whole world by slowly pervading into each country’s national policies. The US government knew that it can never win the world by itself much less win an armed conflict like that of Vietnam War and the Gulf War, but it can somehow build a new world order under its direction by creating and funding revolutions in volatile states, or in making some governments unstable and thus becoming susceptible to insurgencies.

Maybe Gaddafi was right. He continue to cling onto Libya for after all the supposed winners of the revolutions, if he steps down, would not be the Libyans but the US and its anti-democratic and imperialist economic policies. And North Africa and Middle East, in its volatile condition, are an easy prey to the sharp talons of the American Bald Eagle embodying a very greedy inhumane international agenda.

And what makes the US so intrusive? It may be the natural resources, natural wealth, oil. For always, oil is gold. Gold is power. Power is luxury.