|
WSWS
: News &
Analysis : Middle
East : Libya
Libyan arms scandal shows widening rift between Europe and
US
By Trevor Johnson
17 January 2000
Use
this version to print
Growing foreign policy differences between Europe and the US
were highlighted by the revelation that British Customs officials
had found a consignment of Scud missile parts bound for Libya
in May, months before the Blair Labour government restored links
with the regime of Colonel Muammar Gadhaffi.
Last week's Sunday Times ran a front-page story, portraying
the missile parts shipment as a major plot to break Britain's
arms embargo against Libya. The 32 crates were labelled as spare
parts for cars, although carrying the name of a clothing company
in Taiwan called Hontex. The Sunday Times initially claimed
that the Scud parts were capable of extending the missile's range
from 200 to 600 miles, putting southern Italy within Libya's reach,
but the foreign office later denied this, saying that the parts
were only spares for existing ballistics.
The story said that the parts had been discovered in November,
after Britain had normalised its relations with Libya. Eventually,
the British government admitted that the parts first arrived at
Gatwick and had been discovered by Customs officers and intelligence
staff, in May of last year. Although the officials were said to
have asked British Airways at Gatwick airport to stop the shipment,
the crates were loaded onto a plane and flown on to Malta. Only
then were they seized by the Maltese authorities and returned
to Gatwick in July, the same month that diplomatic relations were
officially restored. The shipment was impounded pending investigation
and formally seized by Customs in November.
The government said that it had concealed the find for months
because it did not want to jeopardise its diplomatic relations
with Libya. The reason for this sensitivity towards what was once
a pariah stateand one still subject to an official arms
embargocan be found in the race by Britain and the rest
of Europe to secure their share of lucrative oil and infrastructure
projects in Libya.
Britain and the European Union (EU) have been working to improve
relations with Libya, ever since Gadhaffi allowed the handing
over for trial in the Netherlands of two Libyan suspects in the
bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in 1988. Last September,
the EU lifted most remaining sanctions imposed on Libya after
the Lockerbie bombing, although the arms embargo remains.
Libya has around 3 percent of the world's known oil reserves,
and the valuable raw material can be extracted there more cheaply
than from many other countries. Anything that cut across Britain's
striving for friendly relations with Libya would allow Italy and
France to secure their domination over the region's oil. Italian
energy producer ENI has reached a deal with Libya's National Oil
Corporation to jointly develop gas and oil reserves estimated
at around 1.8 billion barrels. ENI, which has been in Libya since
1959 and currently produces 80,000 barrels a day from the Bu-Attifel
oilfield, predicted the deal could generate investments of $5.5
billion. Production is expected to begin in late 2003.
Gadhaffi has given Italy first priority on all contracts to
upgrade oil installations, but British oil equipment suppliers
are hoping to take some of this business, exporting new equipment
to replace the antiquated machinery currently in use. British
Aerospace has been holding discussions with Libya for some time
(even before the dropping of sanctions) on a $10 billion contract
to modernise Libya's airline, and Labour MP Roger Stott described
Libya as traditionally ... a strong British market.
In 1992, prior to the introduction of sanctions, exports from
Britain to Libya totalled £228 million.
Libya has denied accusations of trying to ship missile parts
through Britain, blaming forces that are "unhappy with the
current improvement of co-operation between the Libyan Jamahiriya
and Great Britain" for whipping up the issue. This is a veiled
reference to the US government, which has conflicted with the
European states over the thaw in their relations with Libya.
In 1986 Washington severed all economic and commercial relations
with Libya, accusing it of giving aid to international terrorists.
The US used the Lockerbie bombing to whip up a frenzy against
Libya and justify the imposition of UN sanctions. In 1996 Congress
passed the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act, which imposes penalties on
countries investing more than $40 million per year in Libya's
oil and gas industry.
In May last year, the Senate passed a resolution urging President
Clinton to prevent the lifting of UN sanctions until Tripoli renounces
terrorism, pays compensation to the families of the Pan Am 103
victims and agrees to co-operate with the trial of two Libyan
suspects.
After Libya handed its two citizens over for trial, many expected
that the US sanctions would be softened and the way opened for
relations to improve between the two countries. Instead, a clear
divergence of European and US policy developed in respect to Libya.
Europe has become increasingly irritated by the Iran-Libya
Sanctions Act, which penalises non-US companies for not adhering
to American policies on Libya and Iran. At the same time, European
companies have sought to take advantage of the inability of their
US counterparts to invest in Libya to corner strategic markets.
The other rogue state at the top of the US's hit
list, Iran, has also become a focus for foreign policy differences
between the US and Europe, over the question of oil. The European
powers are attempting to grab control of oilfields in the Caspian
region of the former USSR by promoting a trade link between the
Black Sea and Central Asia, through the construction of a highway
from Turkey to Georgia. The Shah Deniz oilfield in the Caspian
is being explored by a consortium led by European corporations,
without US involvement, which wants to erect a pipeline through
Iran. The US opposes any pipeline running through Iran and is
counterposing its own plan for a pipeline that skirts around Iran,
despite this route being much longer and more costly.
Strategic foreign policy concerns underlay the apparently inexplicable
intransigence of the US towards Libya. US foreign policy is grounded
on demonising the leaders of oppressed countries such as Libya
and Iran, in order to justify its aggressive ambitions to dominate
the globe. For several years, the US has used the supposed threat
from Arab states as a bogeyman to replace the role played by the
USSR during the Cold War in providing an external enemy against
whom the western powers must unite.
Washington is likely to try using the missile incident to persuade
Europe to support moves to develop a regional anti-missile system
to match the national protective shield, which is expected to
be given the go-ahead by President Clinton this summer. The sole
argument advanced by the US in favour of such a system (known
as mini-Star Wars) rests upon the claim of a threat
from "rogue" or "terrorist" states, and Libya
and Iran in particular. The European powers are strongly resisting
the US plan, saying it would lead to a new arms race.
See Also:
Britain extends diplomatic
recognition to Libya
[10 December 1999]
Libya's Colonel Gadhaffifrom
pariah to African "statesman"
[22 July 1999]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |