LIBYA'S WATER

The Man Made River Project, Libya - Travel Photos by Galen R.

luis said...

From Pepe Escobar:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MC30Ak01.html

Few in the West may know that Libya - along with Egypt - sits over the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer; that is, an ocean of extremely valuable fresh water.

So yes, this "now you see it, now you don't" war is a crucial water war.

Control of the aquifer is priceless - as in "rescuing" valuable natural resources from the "savages".

This Water Pipelineistan - buried underground deep in the desert along 4,000 km - is the Great Man-Made River Project (GMMRP), which Gaddafi built for $25 billion without borrowing a single cent from the IMF or the World Bank (what a bad example for the developing world).

The GMMRP supplies Tripoli, Benghazi and the whole Libyan coastline.

The amount of water is estimated by scientists to be the equivalent to 200 years of water flowing down the Nile.

Compare this to the so-called three sisters - Veolia (formerly Vivendi), Suez Ondeo (formerly Generale des Eaux) and Saur - the French companies that control over 40% of the global water market.

All eyes must imperatively focus on whether these pipelines are bombed.

An extremely possible scenario is that if they are, juicy "reconstruction" contracts will benefit France.

That will be the final step to privatize all this - for the moment free - water.

From shock doctrine to water doctrine...

~~

http://twelfthbough.blogspot.com/2011/03/libya-oil-uranium-and-war.html

felix left a comment on "LIBYA'S WATER":

All built by the Americans via the back door subsidiary of Brown & Root (Halli burton) in the UK, using Malta as the hop-off point, during the times when anyone else was in big trouble for trading with Libya,post Lockerbie.
http://www.fas.org/news/libya/971202-nyt.htm

Arab Spring confounds old Left/Right political categories

The Arab Spring uprising has changed the face of world politics.

The old categories of right and left are floundering.

In the case of Libya, the non-interventionist Left finds itself sharing a skanky Tracy Emin-type bed with right wing ranters like Kelvin MacKenzie and the Israeli Government, who, surprisingly, have historic ties with Ghaddafi.  Israel backed Mubarrak, and seems to think it has an interest in surrounding itself with amenable (to them) dictators, seeing democracy as a threat that could bring Islamicist parties into, or near, power. This Israeli mis-perception, expressed in the Washington lobbies, may be one reason that the Obama has been so slow to come in on the side of the Libyan freedom fighters. Fearing an Arab outcry if he intervenes, he finds that he is under increasingly strong criticism for his reluctance to intervene.

The failure of the Left to see that if Ghaddafi wins, democratic movements everywhere (including in the West) are more exposed to lethal violence from dictatorial states, is remarkable.  It is a triumph of narrow political ideology over humanitarian and democratic aspirations across the world.  It seems that in their view, since Ghaddafi preaches some kind of socialism, and is a friend of Chavez of Venezuela, there is no case for Libyan people to experience freedom and self-determination. This is not rational thinking.

What is socialism for, if it does not stand for the interests of people against repressive, corrupt and brutal regimes?

Another mental short-circuit exists over the West. Because the US and UK have acted illegally and foolishly in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is reasoned that they must never intervene, even to stop massacres.  It is a short circuit, because it is thinking in absolutist, not operational categories. The West has acted wrongly, therefore it will always act wrongly. This is the same mistake that parents can make, in saying "You are a bad child" rather than "That action was a mistake".

The Arab Uprising is a game changer. It is an uprising of youth, often suffering a high rate of unemployment, but well educated, and in communication with youth across the world through social media.  Amazingly, they are demonstrating non-violently, at least initially, before force is used against them.  Tunisia and Egypt show that so long as the Army is not deployed against the demonstrators, peaceful demonstrations can overcome brutal dictatorships, and this is a great cause for hope.

The outcome of these democratic changes depends almost entirely on the post-revolution economics. If countries persist with the old, quasi-free-market economics, unemployment will persist, and the revolution will sink back into the quagmire of political and economic stagnation, leading to general disorder and a return of dictatorship.

If, on the other hand, the new countries develop a new economics aimed at stabilising access to basic resources like water, food and renewable energy, unemployment will be a forgotten nightmare, and the world can set off  towards a new, peaceful and sustainable future.

Unity of purpose will save the Arab Spring revolutions

Revolutions have an unfortunate tendency to end in dictatorships. The English Revolution/Civil War led to Oliver Cromwell's dictatorial Commonwealth. The French Revolution led to Bonaparte. The Russian Revolution led to totalitarian communism.

When an authoritarian regime is swept aside by a revolution, there is a natural tendency for all forms of constraint to be rejected. This may be one reason why crime rates are so high in post-apartheid South Africa.

Immediately after a revolution there is a period of confusion. The unity of purpose on the part of the revolutionaries, the single minded determination to remove the dictator and his regime, is replaced by innumerable ideas of what to do next, ranging from out and out change to all aspects of political life, to a desire to get back to normal life without the dictatorship.

The revolutionaries have many ideas, typically leaning towards self-government and anarchy (in its correct sense). On the other hand, the Civil Service remains in place, and there is a real need for it to function in order to continue running the infrastructure -  water, food production, energy, waste collection and such services as the population is used to. If this period of disorder persists, there is a high probability that a strong man (it is usually a man) or strong party to emerge and restore order.

The new incumbent tends to clamp down on what it perceives as disorder. This can then lead to a control motif in the government's actions. They seek to control public opinion through the press, to control political dissent through arbitrary arrests and imprisonment, to develop a secret police, and to develop a network of informers. They may even use the same institutions that ran the pre-revolutionary regime. There is a vicous cycle to control, since the more control is attempted, the stronger the resentment against control, and the more control force has to be used.

So there exists a malign cycle of dictatorship, revolution and dictatorship. How can humanity step outside the cycle?

The key is in unity of purpose. Revolutions succeed because all groups have a common objective - to rid the country of the present dictator. After success, everyone falls back into their old narrow concerns and self-interest, and the revolution falls apart, or is hijacked.  They may be united in the desire to have free elections, but here again a plethora of political parties show up, competing with each other, and allowing well resourced parties with links to multinational corporations to win and dominate Parliament.

The way out of this cycle is to maintain the unity of purpose after the election by addressing big economic problems.

In the Middle East/North Africa arena there are three factors that can provide this unity of purpose: unemployment and water scarcity.

Unemployment, especially youth unemployment, is a common feature of most of the countries affected by dictatorship. Water scarcity is also a feature of these lands. The area also has a rich resource

The solution is to start a massive New Deal in constructing an infrastructure to manage water efficiently. All roofs will be converted to rainwater collecting systems, linked to storage tanks. Water filters and purifiers will be provided both for collected rainwater and for grey water emerging from use. Sewage systems will be upgraded, and supplemented with dry sanitation systems where possible, especially in rural areas.

Solar desalination will be installed in coastal areas. The sea hypersalination problem associated with desalination will be met by creating salt beds. Some of this salt may have a market value, and excess can be put into dry storage underground.

Water can be applied to drip irrigation designed to increase food production, since food price rises are a major problem throughout the world.

There will be a programme of afforestation, starting in coastal areas, especially where there is an onshore prevailing wind. The relevance of this is that forestation will eventually have a moderating effect on the regional climate, reducing the need for air conditioning, which will save energy. The trees will provide forage for animals, fruit, leaves (which can assist in dry sewage systems) and wood.

The area has a huge solar power resource.  In coming years, Europe and North Africa will be linked with a HVDC supergrid to distribute solar energy across the region. MENA countries can start installing Photovoltaic electricity generators on roofs and in the desert, developing expertise in the technology.

This economic programme turns economics on its head.

The Western economic model would rely on inward investment from trans-national mega-corporations to supply a bit of high paid work, some of which wealth will be supposed to trickle down to the rest of the economy, apart from those who are unfortunate enough to miss out on work.

The new model is to create work in forming the basic hardware that lies at the foundation of all economies - water, food, energy, and waste management.

If the completed revolutions turn their attention to this new economics, they will find a unity of purpose (not least in opposing the economic dinosaurs who will oppose it tooth and nail), leading to a stable, equitable economy and society.

Israel's options in the new Middle East

The coming changes in North Africa and the Middle East will cause a huge shift in the balance of power in the region.

Wikileaks have shown the intransigent nature of Israeli negotiations. This will now change. Israel must start negotiating in good faith.

Although Zionism predated World War 2, the Nazi Holocaust motivated Jews to found a state for their people in Israel.

The psychological effect of the horror of the Holocaust must be remembered and understood as a the basic motive for the paranoid and aggressive position of the Israeli Government.
The State of Israel has had an expansionist policy ever since its foundation, displacing Palestinians to an extent that can be characterised as ethnic cleansing, and has also denied human rights to Palestinians. 

In retaliation for displacement and repression, Palestinians have fought back with hijackings, stones, rockets, and suicide bombings.
In retaliation of this, Israel has responded with ever-greater aerial bombings culminating with the disgraceful bombing of Lebanon in 2006 and Operation Cast Lead in 2008-9.

The mutual, retaliatory, violence-based policy is causing immense human suffering to the peoples of both sides, particularly the Palestinians. Militarism is causing polarisation of opinion, and an escalation of violence that could lead to wider conflict in the Middle East and even global conflict, which could even escalate into nuclear war. 

In order to avoid this diastrous outcome, all parties must focus on a peace settlement based on negotiation and compromise, focused around co-operation in the task of creating a sustainable economy in their arid land.

At the heart of the problem is the fact that the increase in population of Israel/Palestine on the part of both communities demands the functional expansion of the carrying capacity of the land, which demands in turn a functional increase in the supply of water to the area in order to increase the productivity of the land.

This must be based on co-operative water management solutions which will be both innovative and intensive.

It will be based on work on water harvesting, waste minimisation and water recycling, and reafforestation from the coast inwards.

While this work is in progress, the role of the international community is to conceive of and facilitate a way for this situation to come about by dialogue with all actors in the Middle East.

The case for peace is overwhelming from a rational point of view. Reason must displace emotions such as fear and resentment as the primary motive for action.

This objective can only be realised through the mutual recognition of the rights of independent statehood and secure borders of both Palestinians and Israelis; an immediate end to the violence and de-escalation of the arms build-up in the region; enforcement of UN resolutions 242 and 338; international assistance so that both the Palestinian and Israeli states can develop co-operative self-reliance in water management, food production and basic services and industries; and long term exploration of the possibility of establishing a confederation with neighbouring states, with free and equal access for each state's citizens.

All Israelis, Palestinians, and their families should have and be able to exercise full human and civil rights throughout Israel and the occupied territories. Israel should be subject to the Geneva Convention concerning the rights of individuals and communities.

All actors must recognise the right of the people of Israel to exist peacefully within secure borders.

Both the Israeli Government and the PLO to unequivocally reject violence as a means of settling their conflict.
Israel should repeal its present "law of return" because it is incompatible with the full exercise of human rights and is implicitly discriminatory, and is open to the accusation of being racist.

Israel should to have direct talks with representatives of the Palestinian people with a view to ensuring genuine religious, political, economic and other human rights for all people within Israel and the occupied territories.

Israel should allow Palestinians and their families to return to their former homes and be offered full Israeli citizenship, or to compensate those unable or unwilling to return to their homes and/or property.

Arab states should agree a mutual non-aggression pact, and a non-aggression pact with Israel. Such pacts must be guaranteed by the international community.

The United States Government should use its special relationship with Israel to halt military and financial support until Israel enters the dialogue called for above.

The Middle East is faced with a decision. Continuation of the old politics of confrontation and conflict can only lead to war. Co-operation in securing the basis of a sustainable economy for all in the area can lead to a just and lasting peace.

The choice is ours.

Egypt: way forward through maintaining political unity

There have been about 50 revolutions throughout the world since 1990 according to this list.

I was going to study what happens after a revolution, but I can see that this would need a lifetime of study.

It is obvious that each revolution has its own unique setting, characteristics and results, but at the same time, there is a common pattern, with early conflicts over betrayal of the ideals of the revolution, followed by disorder, followed by imposition of order by a strong man or strong party.

The ongoing Egyptian revolution has its own beauty in its non-violent nature, apart from the defensive measures the pro-democracy protesters had to take in response to the thugs. It also gained from the excellent oath taken by Egyptian Army not to kill their fellow-citizens, and this offers hope that Egypt will avoid this chaos-strong man pattern, thus setting an example for the world to follow.

Right now the Egypt revolution is justifiably in a mood of euphoria and a tremendous sense of unity. The physical , life threatening dangers are, hopefully, over.

The next phase means that they are entering the next level of difficulty in this existential game.


Politics.

The revolutionaries have to decide what to do now. Before, opinion was united around the simple insistence that Mubarak must Go.

Now opinion will be spread out on a spectrum between those who want an immediate overthrow of the Cabinet, the regime and all its policies, and those who want Egypt to get back to normal life as soon as possible.

An important part of this spread will be the formation of political parties in preparation for early elections. I know only too well, from 30 years of experience in a marginalised political party, how toxic relations between political parties can become. Personality and ego comes to the fore and reason goes out of the window. Competition is everything: if another party says white, you say black.

If the majority, secular part of Egypt's January 25 movement fragments into many disparate parties, the Muslim Brotherhood could end up as the largest single party in the post-revolutionary Parliament. I think it is highly unlikely, for several reasons, that they will create a theocracy like Iran, but their predominance would feed the paranoia of the US pro-Israeli right, which could lead to further military tensions in the region at a time when we need a popular movement of cooperation focussed on the foundations of the real economy, especially water.

Clearly, what happens now is up to the Egyptian people, but from a distance, which is often a good place to see the whole picture, the best political outcome would be for the secular (with or without the Muslim Brotherhood Jan25 revolutionaries to form an umbrella group to contest the next election, focused on the the 7 Demands, and on a radical direct approach to nation's economic and infrastructure problems: food prices, energy and water management.

Within the term of the post-Revolutionary Parliament, differences would coalesce into the natural political  formation of political parties, who would contest the following election in the usual way.