Globocop

Humanitarian imperialists have been spinning the bombing of Libya prevented a hypothetical massacre in Benghazi.

They have been defending the House of Saud -obviously "responsibility to protect" does not apply to people in Bahrain.

They will be heavily promoting post-Gaddafi Libya as a new - oily - human rights Mecca, complete with US intelligence assets, black ops, special forces and dodgy contractors.

Backing of Libyan rebels apparently aims to clean up West's image across the Arab world

Spreading goodwill, avoiding oil price spikes

So what’s motivating the Western powers into projecting their power into Libya? And why is the West not intervening in Bahrain or Saudi Arabia or Yemen?

The potential benefit of successfully backing the rebels will be an increase in goodwill across the Arab world directed at the West. It is not clear if that is a realistic expectation, but it is one appears to motivate Western leaders.

Meanwhile, the cost of attacking Gaddafi and his mercenaries in a limited way, and supplying the rebels with arms is relatively low. It is not clear if the cost is actually low, but it’s likely that it is perceived that way since the intervention is already underway.

In Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, the opposite is true. The American president Barack Obama will seek reelection, so it is in his interest to prevent the global economy from stagnating then shrinking.

A successful revolution in Bahrain may destabilise Saudi Arabia which would drive the price of oil up which could cause the US economy to stall. It is just not a risk worth taking for him.

Probably, fears of an insurgent Iran – legitimate or not – play into his calculations as well. That’s because most Bahrainis are Shias.

Likewise, Yemen permits the Americans to pursue Al Qaeda affiliates in that country. That goes directly to Obama’s security credentials.

If Yemen lapses, Obama will be accused, rightly or wrongly, of permitting terrorist sympathizers to take control in yet another Middle Eastern country. And the 2012 election campaign is already underway.

Intervention in Libya could turn out badly in a many different and unforeseen ways. And imperialism and neoliberal “reforms” – which are a problem in that country – did not arrive with the revolution; they preceded it.

The UN No-Fly Zone over Libya

Mona Eltahawy

Has Chavez been drinking the Nescafe?

"Demagoguery"

As a defiant and delusional Muammar Gaddafi continues his attempt to ride out an historical avalanche of people-power in his country, the champions of the Bolivarian “Left” in Latin America have been conspicuously absent in their support for the people of Libya.

As my colleague Gabriel Elizondo recently pointed out, tiny Nicaragua has rushed to show solidarity with the man who has given it over $300 million and who still claims, “they love me, all my people are with me” despite losing almost every town and city in his country barring the capital, to the protesters. Protesters - he claims - who are being drugged by “Osama bin Laden” who has put “things in their Nescafe”. Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega said Gaddafi is ‘waging a great battle’ for his country.

Prior to February 28 there was still room for doubt as to the extent of Hugo Chavez’s support for Gaddafi. He had refused to openly weigh in on the issue, and the only evidence for his support had been a tweet of his saying “…viva Libya and its independence! Kadafi is facing a civil war!!”

A changing world

But the man who models himself on Latin America’s liberator Simon Bolivar, and projects himself as an heir to his legacy (and sometimes to Fidel Castro’s) - is finding himself in a changing world.

He may see himself as a leader of the global “Left” - but what left is he claiming to lead?

The enemy-of-my-enemy “Left”, of hollow, mud-slinging slogans, in support of anything or anyone who claims to oppose imperialism in all its forms in this Yankee-dominated world, no matter how monstrous his policies?

Or a principled “Left” based on respecting the values entrenched in the universal declaration of human rights, democracy and most importantly, the “Left” which places it’s support squarely on the part of the people tormented, rather than their tormentor.

Chavez’s open support for Gaddafi (who he presented with a replica of one of Bolivar’s swords in 2009) despite his outrageous disregard for his own people, disturbingly intent to “open the arms depots” and let his country “burn”, rather than listen to the demands of Libyans, at this crucial point in the history of the region - sounds vacuous and adolescent.

In fact, it’s starting to sound like he’s been drinking some of that hallucinogenic Nescafe that Gaddafi was talking about...

Gaddafi delusional, disconnected from reality

Libya's lucrative ties

How guilt is the West double standards when it comes to deal with Arab regimes?

Qadhafi Incorporated

Cables obtained by WikiLeaks offer a vivid account of the lavish spending, rampant nepotism and bitter rivalries.

Qaddafi’s tight control of the media have added to the public anger now boiling over. And the tensions between siblings could emerge as a factor in the chaos in the oil-rich African country.

The unrest in Lybia