A victory for moral clarity

It’s hard for the West to understand the full scope of the disaster that’s befallen Libya. It’s happened, in part, because no one in or outside Libya bothered to figure out what the country might really look like after the dictator was gone.

BusinessWeek, August 7, 2014

Early this year, the Libyan Investment Authority filed suit against Goldman Sachs. LIA claims that, “Goldman Sachs abused the relationship of trust and confidence with the then newly-formed LIA…The fund suffered significant losses.”

How significant? In 2008, the LIA made a $1.3 billion investment with Goldman. The money evaporated. For their formidable investment advice, Goldman also received $350 million in fees.

Just Goldman doing what Goldman does, perhaps.

The LIA was formed in 2006. After the Qaddafi regime made a clean breast of its chemical and nuclear weapons programs, and paid reparations to the families of Lockerbie victims, Libya was removed from the State Department’s list of states sponsoring terrorism. Moammar Qaddafi’s son Seif drove the establishment of the largest sovereign wealth fund in Africa, seeing it as a way to diversify the Libyan economy away from its dependence on oil. (Although under the table payments from western investment banks may have helped him see the light.)

The Libyans, now able to engage western financial institutions, but not terribly sophisticated, seem to have become the targets of every sharp operator from Société Générale to Goldman Sachs. Which I suppose is just investment banks doing what investment banks do – that is, exploit every asymmetry available to them.

The story might have ended there, with only a slow bleed into the shark pool while Libya learned to swim. But then came Libya’s version of the Arab Spring, only this time with an opposition armed and supported by NATO.

When protesters clashed with Libyan security, western powers decided to take the moral high ground. Libyan government forces had fired on civilians. The Libyan government was therefore evil. The opposition was therefore good. Q.E.D.

With NATO money, weapons, and 26,000 airstrikes, the opposition was, not too surprisingly, victorious. Although you have to stick to a pretty narrow definition of “victory” to appreciate it.

Thousands of heavily armed gangsters daily roaming the streets, kicking down doors and breaking into government ministries, extorting millions on a whim, torturing or killing anyone who crosses them or maybe just looks funny – the victors make Latin American drug cartels look like buttoned-down businessmen doing lunch at the rotary club. You’d rather work for the cartels.

Three years after Qaddafi was killed and nearly everyone involved in running the government either sent packing or summarily executed, virtually nothing in Libya works, except the oil terminals. The one thing the gangsters seem to agree on is to keep the cash coming.

As BusinessWeek put it, “…Libyans who opposed Qaddafi and fought for a more equal and democratic future, have been murdered. Their deaths have passed without any demonstrations…a measure of how irrelevant the causes for which Libyans fought three years ago have become. Libya’s economic future, once touted as the brightest in Africa, looks equally bleak.”

This morass of anarchy is a direct result of “moral clarity” in the west – truly a form of negligence. Focus on one particular ‘evil’, trumpet it long enough and loudly enough, and we can all forget the messy, inconvenient details.

And that is exactly what we have done.

 

 

 

The inevitable bombing

U.S. airstrikes are beginning in Iraq. The initial objectives are necessarily limited. But it is hard to see how they can stay that way. President Obama told reporters, “I don’t think we’re going to solve this problem in weeks…This is going to be a long-term project.”

Project? Exactly what project is this?

The project to remake the Middle East as an American sphere of influence was a hopeless delusion of the previous administration –  delusion, because they apparently believed the peoples of the region would throw themselves at our feet in gratitude; hopeless, because they had no interest in learning the truth.

Is the project to save Iraq? I have harped before on the fact that Iraqi institutions don’t function. They will not begin functioning because we save Baghdad from being overrun. The Shiite powers-that-be will feel even more secure in their autocracy and corrupt political practice.

Is the project to save lives? The Islamic State may be brutal toward its enemies, but the absence of a functioning state that includes the Sunni majority may become a humanitarian disaster in its own right, albeit one we may easily ignore as Western media will not brave the dangers to cover the suffering of daily life, and Western news consumers will quickly tire of it.

In other words, kill enough fighters to stop the fighting, and then we can go home again.

So the project seems to be to manage our own domestic politicians, who are using scenes of fleeing Christians and the bogeyman of ISIS to club the administration, after remaining silent for years while Iraqi PM Maliki gutted the Iraqi army of the officers we trained and tightened his grip on power.

Anything else is probably beyond the capabilities of the world’s largest democracy.

Don’t be naive, right?

The government in Beijing has quietly removed a number of Apple devices from its approved purchasing list, including iPads and MacBooks. Some sort of trade sanction? Nope. They believe iOS has been hacked by the NSA.

They have good reason to believe it. We’ve all heard about the PRISM program, about something called Dropout Jeep, and about Shotgiant.

Shotgiant began as a program to hack into Huawei servers and steal information. But it didn’t end there. It morphed into a program to insert backdoors into Huawei communications products:

Rather than stop at simply collecting more information than it could process, however, a NSA special-operations unit bored into the company’s technical data, eventually compromising servers holding source code for the firmware that runs the routers and switches Huawei builds for large corporations and telecommunications companies.

The goal was to build secret backdoors or security flaws into the source code, which Huawei would then build into its own products and distribute to a customer base so large that Huawei boasts that its products connect a third of the world’s population.

EETimes Asia

More of the ‘good fight’, right? They do it to us, so we do it to them.

Maybe. What strikes me is that it’s a long, long way from the hoary notion that a fully interconnected and integrated world will be a peaceful one, because no one wants to upset the shared prosperity. This may in fact be the long term goal of many a statesman, such as those behind the Euro project. But it isn’t the goal of the security services of Russia, China, or the US. Their goal is much simpler: Beat the other guys.

The security services of at least two of these nations are arguably beyond control of their respective civilian governments. I’m not so sure about China. Beijing might possibly be in control, or the PLA may enjoy even more autonomy than it appears.

The UK’s GCHQ seems to be an adjunct of the NSA. This leaves the rest of Europe, which years ago became a battleground in US-Russia tensions.

To me the underlying reality traces back to the ‘military-industrial complex’, made so notorious by President Eisenhower in his farewell address. It’s really a National Security Complex (NatSecCom?), shifting with the latest designated adversary, that uses secrecy and fear to build careers and acquire power. China has one. Russia has one. And so do we.

Russia may implode. And then there will be two, plus possibly another failed state to add to the list of casualties of the war that never ended.

 

It’s hard to hold the high ground this way

The Associated Press has revealed a covert program in which the U.S. Agency for International Development “sent nearly a dozen neophytes from Venezuela, Costa Rica and Peru to gin up opposition in Cuba”. According to AP, the recruits “posed as tourists…”, to “recruit young Cubans to anti-government activism.”

No doubt there are many who think this is fighting the good fight. Maybe it is.

Surely the USAID operation was a small one. But it comes on the heels of other “good fights” that wound up destabilizing regions, from covertly arming the Afghan mujahedeen to covertly organizing civil disobedience in Eastern Europe. Which is possibly because realpolitik quickly ends up being about careerism, about playing cowboys and Indians in other corners of the world, and riding off into the sunset after we’ve notched up another ‘win’.

If all is fair in realpolitik, then there are no other principles. All are trumped by whatever the people operating in secrecy deem to be “the good fight”. USAID. The CIA. The NSA. Politicians in Congress. Pentagon bureaucrats. The notion of a world order founded on peaceful sovereign states who respect borders and work through international institutions, so beloved of Western pontificators at the moment (see “Ukraine”), remains a bit of propaganda-fluff, useful to rally masses of people who might think it is actually intended to mean something.

So European.

In light of the epic disasters of Afghanistan (pre- and post-9/11) and Iraq, one has to wonder if Vladimir Putin’s designs on Ukraine could possibly be worse.

 

Meanwhile, the Islamic State

After days of diplomacy, Secretary of State John Kerry has apparently brokered a 72-hour temporary ceasefire in Gaza. This is considered a hard-won victory.

Meanwhile, the Islamic State captured a major Syrian gas field, despite Syrian reinforcements (their announcement here; beware graphic pictures); overran a Syrian Army base near the city of Raqqa, which they now control; and collected recruits defecting from other anti-Assad rebel groups.

Baghdad is almost under siege, even with US advisors and armed drones operating. The Islamic State is consolidating its hold over Mosul, a city of two million.

Kurdistan is pressing the US for arms to help it hold the Islamic State at bay. Washington is loathe to arm the region directly, not only because it would further undercut Baghdad’s already minimal authority, but because it might empower Kurdistan to declare its independence.

Washington is crippled by domestic politics and its inability to deal rationally with militants. Everybody’s a terrorist, and we don’t deal with terrorists. In the meantime, the entire region has devolved into post-Soviet Afghanistan writ large. There, we were able to wash our hands and forget it, until 9/11 brought it back. Not here.

What’s left is covert war, maybe along the lines of the CIA war in Pakistan, but on a much larger scale and with special forces involved, in support of an incompetent sham of a government.

Sounds a little too much like Vietnam, doesn’t it?

 

 

Just when we think we’ve got him where we want him

Is it just me, or is this turning out to be an exciting week?

The US and EU are launching draconian sanctions against Russian banks and energy companies, and against a number of Russian leaders personally. The intent is clearly to tighten an economic and political noose until Russian President Putin either backs down and abandons Ukrainian separatists (and, presumably, Crimea), or is forced from office – although just who could unwind the Russian foray without himself being overthrown in a coup is a big question.

Washington and Brussels would seem to have Mr. Putin where they want him, boxed in and caught right in their sights.

But hold the phone. The Independent claims a scoop, that German Chancellor Merkel is negotiating a deal with Putin to give everyone a way to back down. Major terms:

  • Russia keeps Crimea, but compensates Kiev for lost rent at Sevastopol
  • Russia withdraws support for Ukrainian rebels
  • Eastern Ukraine is granted more self-government
  • Kiev agrees not to join NATO
  • Moscow agrees not to interfere with Kiev’s EU trade relations
  • Gazprom enters a new long-term supply contract for Ukraine

At the very least, if the negotiations are real and become public, the sanctions will undoubtedly be eased, despite gnashing of teeth of western hardliners.

If that happens, Mr. Putin will surely have earned a black belt in political judo.

And Chancellor Merkel’s stature as stateswoman will overshadow, for a time, that of any other western leader.

Plan B

Probably to no one’s surprise, a US Magistrate has ordered the seizure of 1 million barrels of Kurdish oil parked 60 miles outside the Port of Galveston. US Marshalls will seize the tanker should it enter the US territorial limit, which it would now be foolish to do.

What is Plan B for the not-quite independent republic of Kurdistan? Well, they have sold oil to Israel in the past. But now that Baghdad has seen what lawyers are capable of, if the Kurds attempt to repeat this trick, it will undoubtedly land in an Israeli court. Baghdad claims the oil is stolen property. As much as the Israeli government might like to thumb its nose at the US, it doesn’t seem likely their courts could find a way to allow the importation of stolen goods.

Unless Kurdistan were to declare independence. They would need at least one major state to recognize it. And it could only be a state with poor relations with the West.

One comes to mind. But could the Kremlin make any hay out of the breakup of Iraq? Possibly. If Mr. Putin suddenly became the peacemaker in Iraq and Syria.

Something to think about.