Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

Noam Chomsky: War in Libya is a war

for 'dependable client to West'

A prominent American thinker and writer, professor of linguistics and philosophy at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Noam Chomsky, strongly criticizes the West's
intervention in the course of events in Libya, citing as the main reason for intervention
concerns about Libyan oil.

Professor says:

"Last month, at the international tribunal on crimes during the civil war in Sierra Leone,
the trial of former Liberian president Charles Taylor came to an end.

Former U.S. prosecutor David Crane told a London Times noted that the case suffers
from deficiencies. Then, international prosecutors had intended to punish Libyan leader
Muammar Gaddafi a major penalty for murder and mayhem 1 million 200 thousand
people, but the U.S., Britain and their allies have prevented that.

The former chief prosecutor, US law professor David Crane, informed The Times of
London that the case was incomplete: The prosecutors intended to charge Muammar
Gaddafi, who, Crane said, "was ultimately responsible for the mutilation, maiming and/or
murder of 1.2 million people."

But the charge was not to be. The US, UK and others intervened to block it. Asked why,
Crane said, "Welcome to the world of oil"."
Further Noam Chomsky points out that the dimensions of the U.S. defeat in Iraq could no
longer be concealed, even though Washington was trying to conceal the truth behind the
fine phrases. Considerations on oil have prompted the West to respond to what is
happening in the Arab world.

In Kuwait, small demonstrations were crushed. The mailed fist struck in Bahrain after
Saudi-led military forces intervened to ensure that the minority Sunni monarchy would
not be threatened by calls for democratic reforms.

Meanwhile, the world's primary energy resources happen to be located near the northern
Persian Gulf (or Arabian Gulf, as Arabs often call it), largely Shiite, a potential nightmare
for Western planners.

In Egypt and Tunisia, the popular uprising has won impressive victories, but as the
Carnegie Endowment reported, the regimes remain and are "seemingly determined to
curb the pro-democracy momentum generated so far.

Chomsky notes that the conflict in Libya is a different case. The West prefers to bring to
power in this oil-rich country, which is under the dictatorship of Gaddafi, unreliable ruler
dependent on the West.

On March 22, as Gaddafi's forces were converging on the rebel capital of Benghazi, top
Obama Middle East adviser Dennis Ross warned that if there is a massacre, "everyone
would blame the United States for it," an unacceptable consequence.
West did not want to gain Gaddafi as a result of the final suppression of the opposition,
and therefore imposed no-fly "zone. This intervention has to some extent prevented the
massacre in Benghazi.

And the West certainly didn't want Gaddafi to enhance his power and independence by
crushing the rebellion, and therefore imposed a no-fly zone. The intervention prevented a
likely massacre in Benghazi.

Nevertheless, discussions began that the Libyan oil can not be the main motive for
Western intervention, because the Western countries received oil under Gaddafi, as at
that time it was like with Saddam Hussein.

The primary consideration of the West, as expressed in his time by George Bush, was
that "dependable clients to the West" must be in power in the countries of the region.