From: nyxfer%panix.com@UMCVMB.missouri.edu (N.Y. Transfer)
Subject: ANALYSIS:Libyan Sanctions Have Little Support
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: daemon@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: University of Missouri
Resent-From: "Rich Winkel" <MATHRICH@UMCVMB.missouri.edu>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:47:56 GMT


Via The NY Transfer News Service ~ All the News that Doesn't Fit

Sanctions against Libya gain little support

By David Perez

(Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted
if source is cited.)

On April 2, the Libyan masses took to the streets in angry
response to the U.S.-led sanctions against their country voted on
March 31 by the United Nations Security Council.

The UN resolution aims to stop air travel to Libya, ban the sale
of airplanes and spare parts, and stop arms deliveries. While the
Security Council 's move is said to be caused by Lybia's refusal
to turn over "terrorist suspects," the unstated goal is to
destabilize and overthrow the anti-imperialist Qaddafi
government--a goal Washington and the Pentagon have sought to
achieve for years.

Embassies targeted

The demonstrations targeted the embassies of countries that voted
in favor of the embargo, which is scheduled to take effect on
April 15. According to the April 3 New York Times, "noisy,
violent" demonstrations were held "outside the embassies of
France, Belgium, Hungary and Austria."

Windows were broken and slogans were painted on the walls of the
Italian embassy, which represents Britain. Britain, along with
France and the U.S., was one of the principal imperialist
countries pushing for sanctions against Libya.

Militant actions were also staged at the Venezuelan and Russian
embassies. The Venezuelan embassy was completely torched;
Venezuela held the Security Council presidency at the time the
sanctions were voted.

The only reason the U.S. embassy was not under siege is because
it doesn't have one. Washington abandoned its embassy when it
broke off diplomatic relations with Libya in 1979. Nonetheless,
both the Qaddafi government and the people know U.S.
imperialism's the ringleader of the campaign against Libya.

Arab League says no

The Arab League has unanimously condemned the UN decision. Even
pro-U.S. regimes like Egypt have had to distance themselves from
this act of aggression against Libya. On March 18, both Egypt and
Syria came out against the use of sanctions. And the masses of
the Arab world are solidly opposed to it.

While the U.S. still dominates the UN as much if not more than
before the war against Iraq, the March 31 Security Council vote
on Libya was revealing. While the Bush administration got the
resolution passed more or less the way it wanted, the fact that
five countries--Morocco, India, China, Zimbabwe and Cape Verde--
abstained exposes the U.S. as virtually devoid of Third World
support. This is markedly different from when the UN voted for
sanctions against Iraq. No country opposed it then. And when it
came to approving military action only Yemen and Cuba voted
against it. How different it is this time around.

The invasion and the genocidal war that was carried out against
Iraq, and the continuing economic sanctions--none of which has
bettered the situation for the oppressed masses anywhere--have
raised the level of hostility to U.S. imperialism in the Third
World.

India's vote to abstain was especially significant in light of
the great pressure it is under to abandon state capitalism in
favor of a neocolonialist privatization of its industries.

Zimbabwe's abstention should be viewed in light of how it stopped
the Russian government's attempt to take down the old Soviet
hammer and sickle flag and hoist the reactionary flag of the new
Russian government at the Soviet Embassy in Harare.

With that one incident the Zimbabwean government really spoke for
all Africa. Its abstention on Libya counts for a great deal more
than it may seem on the surface.

If there is any political lesson to be learned from the
post-U.S.-Iraq war it is that the Pentagon's blueprint for world
domination was pointedly disregarded at the UN session on Libya.
The abstentions, the opposition in the Arab League--all this and
more demonstrates to the Pentagon that it cannot just go its own
way.

And the Libyan masses' response means they too stand ready to
resist.

                               ###

This article originally appeared in Workers World newspaper. A
10-week trial subscription is available for $2. A year's
subscription costs $15. Makes checks payable to Workers World,
and send to 46 W. 21 St., New York, NY 10010.Phone (212)
255-0352. You may contact Workers World editors on New York
Transfer or PeaceNet at "workers."

-----
from the MIDDLE EAST Newsfeed - NY Transfer News Service
Modem: 718-448-2358  nytransfer@igc.org  nyxfer@panix.com

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive