Wikileaks: Hillary Clinton Helped Topple Gadhafi While France & UK Fought Over Libya’s Oil

Clinton bragged about the U.S. role in Moammar Gadhafi’s death, and her emails leaked by Wikileaks show the race to claim Libya’s resources in the aftermath.
By @KitOConnell |
Share this article!
  • Reddit
    • Google+

    WASHINGTON — A message from Hillary Clinton’s private email server reveals that France and the United Kingdom both sought to control Libya’s oil in the days after the U.S.-backed coup in 2011.

    An email sent on Sept. 16, 2011 to Clinton, then the U.S. Secretary of State, from journalist and family friend Sidney Blumenthal, shows that French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister David Cameron each traveled to Tripoli about one month after Moammar Gadhafi’s government fell in order to assert their claim on Libya’s energy reserves.

    They made these demands, Blumenthal wrote, during meetings with the country’s National Transitional Council, a de facto government which formed with Western support in the aftermath of the coup:


    official MintPress sponsor

    “According to knowledgeable individuals, as part of this effort, the two leaders, in private conversations, also intend to press the leaders of the NTC to reward their early support for the rebellion against Muammar al Qaddafi. Sarkozy and Cameron expect this recognition to be tangible, in the form of favorable contracts for French and British energy companies looking to play a major role in the Libyan oil industry. According to this source, Sarkozy feels, quite strongly, that without French support there would have been no revolution and that the NTC government must demonstrate that it realizes this fact.”

    Blumenthal reported that Cameron sought to downplay the historically strong ties between the U.K.-based BP Oil and the Gadhafi government. France, he wrote, was negotiating “to reserve as much as 35% of Libya’s oil related industry for French firms, particularly the major French energy company TOTAL.”

    Analysis of the Clinton emails by Antiwar.com shows Sarkozy also lusted after Gadhafi’s gold and silver reserves, valued at about $7 billion.

    The United States, France, U.K. and other NATO allies backed rebel forces in Libya that ousted Gadhafi in August 2011, in what was widely reported to be a “humanitarian intervention” against a government with a history of severe human rights abuses.

    Clinton played a major role in convincing allied nations to join in the attacks, and after Gadhafi was killed that October, she boasted during a break in an interview for CBS, “We came, we saw, he died.”

    However, far from improving conditions, the fall of Libya’s government left what was once an economically prosperous nation in chaos and disarray.

    The failed state proved to be a perfect opportunity for Daesh, the terrorist group commonly known in the West as ISIS or ISIL, as Catherine Shakdam reported for MintPress last March. She highlighted that it brought extremists closer to European shores:

    “With ISIS now inserted into the mix of Libya’s unravelling, the country is back on the forefront of the war on terror. Two days after the video surfaced, Egypt’s Ambassador to the U.K. Nasser Kamel told the BBC that ISIS would attempt to break into Europe by exploiting conventional migration routes, camouflaging its fighters within the waves of illegal migrants pouring toward Western capitals.”

    Both the U.S. and France were reported to have re-entered the conflict in Libya in February.

    Clinton’s emails also suggest that another U.S. ally, Israel, supported the destabilization of Syria through efforts to weaken Iran and control energy reserves in Syria’s Golan Heights, a region illegally occupied by Israel.

    Similar to the conflict in Libya, the Syrian civil war is driven by competing interests in gas pipelines which would run through the country.  

    Share this article!

       

      Print This Story Print This Story
      You Might Also Like  
      ___________________________________________
      This entry was posted in Editors Picks, Foreign Affairs, National, Top Stories, Top Story and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
      • Pingback: Assange: WikiLeaks Will Publish Enough Emails To Indict Clinton | Atlas Monitor()

      • Pingback: Assange: WikiLeaks Will Publish Enough Emails To Indict Clinton()

      • Pingback: Jill Stein: Hillary Clinton’s False Feminism Will ‘Fan The Flames Of The Right-Wing Revolt’()

      • Pingback: Clinton’s scandalous email release shows her Machiavellian side – Firebrand News()

      • Pingback: Abby Martin: Clinton A Top Pick Of Corporations()

      • David J Gill

        You realize of course that if the S did nothing in Libya, the USA would be blamed for doing nothing in Libya! My point is that those who hate America are so irrational and so brainwashed by propaganda that everything that America does and doesn’t do will be the cause of everything bad and nothing good.

        • Clockhappy

          The state department’s website has ratings on human rights. In 2009, Libya was highlighting in green indicating excellent human rights conditions. It was one of the only Northern African countries considered stable. After the destabilization in 2011, and ever since, it has been amber. Unfortunately the records only go back 5 or 6 years. I used the site for my master’s program in Summer 2014. We should have learned after Iraq that nation toppling doesn’t work.

          • David J Gill

            Nation toppling worked in Germany and Japan, which is to say that it all depends, though I am inclined to agree that, for the most part, it’s more likely than not to turn out badly.
            But good or bad, don’t you think that Libya and Iraq situations were very different? I have only a thumbnail view sort of knowledge of what went down in Libya, but wasn’t the US and/or NATO asked by Libyan rebels (let’s call’em freedom fighters) to assist their cause with air strikes and that is what we did…and all that we did?

            • Clockhappy

              The “rebels” or “freedom fighters” in the “Arab Spring” were all Islamic militants looking to overthrow the government and install a sharia dictatorship. This includes Egypt, which was also a major blunder, that featured the Muslim Brotherhood as its leadership until the the military coup restored order.

              Comparing Middle Eastern toppling to Germany and Japan is like comparing a moped to an F-22. Japan and Germany were at war with us. Libya, Egypt, Syria and even Iraq were all contextually stable. Yeah Saddam treated his people like garbage, but we have to realize that not everybody likes democracy. When you cut off the head of the snake, all the rats vie for power. We should have realized this after Iraq. Trying to overthrow the other 3 was a disaster that had absolutely nothing to do with humanitarianism. The Herbert Walker Bush policy on drugs and war have cost this nation trillions upon trillions. Clinton(s) have carried that fruitless torch.

              • David J Gill

                Please see my answer to “Tyrhonius” below.

                But ALSO:
                Gaddafi’s history of state sponsored terrorism is well known, if a thing of the past. The Baathist regime is Syria has a similar history. I think your perception of what the US did topple the regime’s in Egypt, Syria and Libya is built on big assumptions that the US must have done something since things turned out so bad.

                What the Obama Admin realized after Iraq was that the US should not get actively militarily involved in another nation in which internal sectarian divisions were sure to come undone (Syria, Libya) or where the will of the people was driving change in an uncertain direction (Egypt.) The coalition effort in Libya limited to air strikes and a naval blockade did nothing more than stop Ghadafi from laying waste to rebel forces. Civill war began in Libya and Syria welll before the US or any Western power did anything. The drive to remove governing regimes came from domestic initiatives in Egypt, Syria and Libya. The US stood almost entirely aloof from Egypt and gave minimal aide to moderate elements in Libya and Syria that were pushed aside by militant islamists. Did that change the outcome in those countries markedly? The whole idea that the US is responsible for the chaos in these countries seems a dubious conclusion. Libyans and Syrians brought down those regimes and it is they who have embraced chaos.

            • Tyrhonius

              Germany and Japan can hardly be compared to Libya. In neither of those cases were there serious ethnic or sectarian divisions within the citizenry. But when you invade a country completely saturated with tribal, ideological or religious fault lines, you are asking for a quagmire.

              • David J Gill

                The reason to compare Germany and Japan on one hand to Libya and Iraq (or Egypt or Syria) is to make the point you offer. The US has been roundly castigated for supporting military dictators in other countries for decades. The hypocrisy involved in that kind of policy was obvious and in various ways the Bush and Obama Admins stepped away from that approach. And that is what the world asked for. Bush knocked off Saddam with the belief that the people of Iraq could govern themselves. Obama stood back from Egypt entirely and offered minimal assistance to moderate rebels in Syria and Libya (and supported somewhat more robust assistance from Britain and France in Libya) only to see the worst elements rise to dominance in each country and focus on retribution rather unity, peace and prosperity.

                The debacle in Iraq was America’s doing; it was the wrong thing to do for all the right reasons. Bush the Elder left Saddam in place after the first Gulf War because he harbored no illusions, but Bush the Younger didn’t bother to ask Dad and Dad kept his own counsel. Saddam had a kind of kind of brutal murderous stability in place that would have held because Saddam never hesitated to up the brutality. The whole trumped up case for war in Iraq, the scandalous public lies of Cheney and the mindless loyalty of Blair is the only part of all this on which the finger of blame hits the mark.

                In Egypt, Syria and Libya homegrown “freedom fighters” or militant Islamists (take your pick) did it themselves. The US did nothing in Egypt, next to nothing in Syria and a little more than that in Libya to aide them. Was the US going to come to the aide of Gaddafi and Assad? Certainly not. You can lament the geopolitical crisis that has resulted from the Arab Spring but there is no case to be made for the US taking action to shore up dictatorship in those countries and there were no voices in the US foreign policy shop making that case. So what do you want?

            • webster

              That is the stupidest comparison I have ever heard. Was Gadhafi attacking the US in 2011? Was he attacking our allies? Sinking our ships? Invading Hawaii? Preposterous.

              We have had 20 Presidents who understood that it is not our business to topple other governments. And when we have strayed from that course (In Viet Nam, Iraq, and in South America) we have paid for it. We destablize, cause chaos in the region, allow even worse regimes to set up. and put at risk half a dozen other, neighboring countries.

              Clinton is a fool. It is bad enough that she rationalized and dissimulated on Iraq, but she learned nothing from her foolishness. If she could just apologize and move on, wiser, it would be bad enough. Iraq, after all, is the worst mistake this country has ever made. But Clinton adds insult, refugees and injury to her stupidity with Egypt, Libya, and Syria. That anyone calls her history “Experience” which qualifies her to be president is the joke of this election.

              • David J Gill

                Pay attention. The question of toppling regimes was of whether it worked and caused positive change or didn’t work. And the point of the comparison is to make it clear that there are reasons why it worked after WWII and didn’t work after the Arab Spring.

                But you seem to be confused about some basic facts: the US DID NOT topple the regimes in Libya, Syria or Egypt. Civil war was under way in those countries well before any Western nation got involved. Gadhafi has had a well known record of engaging in state sponsored terrorism: fact that has not been expunged by time and good behavior.

                Clinton has expressed regret for her Iraq war vote. An apology in addition to that is rather pointless.

                • webster

                  I can’t decide whether you have the naive gullibility of a third grader or you are the consumate $hill for Hillary campaign. Those are the options.

                  If you think that US hands, guns, supplies, logistics, special forces, advisors, encouragement, and piles of cash were not included in our “nudging” all this regime change crap, then you need to go back and take US history 101 and work from there.

                  We know that the US has funded, trained, supported and armed the Taliban and all of its off-shoots for 30 years. We also know that GutlessWimpBush was up to eyeballs in it and that Hillary was all in supporting his term and was THE MAJOR instigator in the Obummer regime. We also know that she ardently supported our incursion into all of those arenas and wanted more.

                  If you think that the US stood idly by and watched all this, you are an abject fool. And if you are voting for Hillary, you deserve her. Good luck.

        • J.C. Doyle

          The fact remains that ‘Merica has done something in Libya. It may be so that there are those that blindly hate ‘Merica and blame the US for a lot of the worlds problems, but that in no way changes any of the things that ‘Merica is guilty of. You try to make it sound as if US haters are responsible for the crimes of America. That is simply a bogus argument.

          • David J Gill

            Please see my answer to “Tyrhonius” above.

            You seem to think the US is responsible for things it didn’t do. A chaotic civil war was already under way when coalition forces got involved. NATO et al acted on the authority of the UN to stop Gadhafi from engaging in a bloodbath to stay in power. Let’s remember this came that this coalition effort came about in response to outrage that Western powers were doing nothing(!!) It should be clear to you that even with the US as the leading voice in NATO and for the special coalition it is apparent that command was not in American hands which may have our greatest mistake regarding the whole effort. Furthermore, Western intervention was not even the most significant factor defining the course of the Libyan Civil War.

            Libyans have had a precious opportunity to remake their nation without Gaddafi that they have squandered to date. The fault for that lies with them. Much of the opportunistic outrage comes from predictable sources with predictable motivations and is made on predictably anti-American, anti-Western conspiratorial assumptions rather than the facts of the matter. What’s the correct interpretation of events? It’s hard to say, but its easy and routine to just blame America. And it’s too easy for the undiscriminating to try to label Libya as another Iraq – a ludicrous idea yet one that you seem willing to jump on board with.

      • Pingback: Wikileaks: Clinton Helped France & UK Claim Libya’s Oil & Gold()

      • Pingback: Key countries back unity government in stabilizing Libya - RiyadhVision()

      • Pingback: Today,s Thought()

      • Hitler died, but his ideology and tactics were fully taken up the US, the UK, and France – not that it was new to the imperialist powers to continue to oppress millions and rob poor countries all over the world. Kill, rob, kill, rob, kill, rob – corporations are the “legitimate” wrapper that the Nazi-like military of the US-UK-France cover themselves with.

        • Scott

          This post is almost too insane to come even from a Bernie supporter. it is flat out wrong on so many levels, but I’ll attempt to point out some your foolishness for you.

          1) Hitlers tactics were not to oppress millions and rob poor countries. For starters tactics isn’t even the right word for what you were trying to say. Hitlers goals were to establish German superiority over the entire world, and kill all the Jews. He robbed countries after he had conquered them simply to pay for his military.

          2) Name 1 country that the US has robbed with our military. I can’t speak for the UK or France because I’m not familiar with their recent history, but the US does not conquer other nations. We have tried and failed to fix countries that have brutalized their citizens, but we don’t capture them, and we certainly don’t rob them.

          3) What do corporations have to do with robbing and killing poor countries militarily? Did you possibly write this while you were high?

          I found this page via link and just realized your post is 3 months old. Have you possibly gotten smarter since then?

      • Pingback: Dat 'Associatieverdrag' is een monster. Een wolf in schaapskleren | Stop de bankiers()

      • SeaNote

        Wikileaks is helping Hillary win the Presidency, when the voters hear that Hillary toppled Gadhafi.

        • Hpower7

          But then created ISIS/ISIL?? Good one, Hillary.

          • David J Gill

            Pardon me. Sarcasm?

      • Kenneth Katzen

        Hillary Clinton’s High crimes and ‘Freddy Got Fingered’
        Consequences Are for Schmucks
        http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433286/hillary-clintons-crimes-prison-impunity

      • Nothing says one party rule as this video inside this article illustrates.

        October 03, 2012 Provoke an Attack on Iran? “Lets Bring it On… At the End of the Day… We Ought to Take ‘Em Out”

        Is the Obama administration seeking to trigger a war pretext incident, a justification to wage an all out war on Iran?

        http://www.globalresearch.ca/provoke-an-attack-on-iran-lets-bring-it-on-at-the-end-of-the-day-we-ought-to-take-em-out/5307044

      • March 25, 2016 American Crime Family Advances On The White House

        Has any American previously been able to run for the presidential nomination while being under investigation by the FBI for security violations? That Hillary Clinton so easily escapes accountability indicates the immunity of those who serve the deep state.

        http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/03/25/american-crime-family-advances-on-the-white-house-paul-craig-roberts/

      • tapatio

        Is there anyone who isn’t fully aware that HELLary Clinton is a prostitute that accepts either money or power as payment? Like her Zionist masters, human life, decency, human rights mean nothing to this sociopathic female (IT is NOT a woman. Women are people and Clinton has become what she worships – sociopathic beasts).

        HERE are Hillary’s only loyalties……………..

        Hillary Clinton with her “BFF”, Lynn de Rothschild of the Rothschild/Bilderberg Banking Cartel
        http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/07/29/article-0-1443B0B8000005DC-748_634x728.jpg

        Hillary and Emperor Bibi of Greater Israel
        http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2015-03-30-1427746737-9234607-2116628215.jpg