Unseen Dangers Lurk in Libya

September 14, 2012 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

Mel Frykberg

TRIPOLI, Sep 14 (IPS) – The revolution might officially be over in Libya but the ground war continues. But one enemy is motionless and often hidden, and Libyans are continuing to pay the price with hundreds maimed and killed. “While the guns may have stopped, landmines, unexploded ordnance (UXO) and discarded or poorly-stored ammunition continue to pose a serious risk to life and limb of the civilian population and to hold potentially serious implications for international security,” according to the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS).

“Two hundred and ten Libyans have been killed or wounded since the end of the war,” Elena Rice from UNMAS told IPS. At least a quarter of that number died, and UNMAS programme manager Max Dyck believes these figures to be conservative.

The country is also awash with small arms. “An estimated 20 million weapons are still freely circulating in Libya today,” Emilie Rolin from Handicap International told IPS. “Three to five victims still arrive in hospital in Tripoli every day.” Handicap International is an independent international aid organisation working in situations of poverty and exclusion, conflict and disaster. The organisation is currently involved in demining projects in Libya.

“The proliferation of all sorts of small arms among the civilian population, who have not been trained to use them, has given rise to accidents which could easily be prevented by specific measures,” Rolin said.

Following the war hundreds of thousands of displaced people have returned to their homes in areas that have been bombed and mined. Families have found explosive remnants of war in their homes, gardens, living rooms, children’s bedrooms, or in their places of work.

Children are often the unwitting targets. “In Misrata (140km east of Tripoli) for example, a third of accidents involve children aged under 14 and nearly 80 percent of recorded victims are civilians under the age of 23. Young people therefore bear the brunt of these accidents,” says Handicap International.

To date the 24 mine clearance and 29 risk education teams comprising 300 personnel currently operating in Libya have destroyed 191,000 landmines and ordnance and cleared 2,650 homes and 75 schools of UXOS. They have also provided 153,000 Libyans with UXO risk education.

But determining the extent of the remaining UXOs is not possible. “There is no way of quantifying this information as accurate records were not kept. Prior to the conflict Libya was contaminated with ‘legacy’ minefields, dating back to World War II. Landmines have been used during various regional conflicts since to protect the border as well as to protect strategic and military assets,” Rice told IPS.

Libya was already littered with UXO before the revolution and from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) bombing campaign last year, but the situation has been significantly aggravated by the war.

The first reports of pro-Gaddafi forces placing new mines began to emerge in late March 2011 when the former government employed anti-personnel and anti-vehicle mines in at least six separate locations including Misrata and Ajdabiya in the east.

The rebellion against the Gaddafi regime also led to an influx of small arms that now threaten to dramatically increase the number of dead and wounded, with rival militias regularly sorting out their differences with weapons.

“Civilians are not used to handling these weapons and know little or nothing about basic safety precautions. These weapons are regularly used during celebrations, even marriages, when guests fire into the air to express their joy,” says Handicap International.

Further complicating the issue is the fact that Nato hasn’t disclosed full details of the UXO it used in Libya. The organisation says that during its air campaign it released 7,700 missiles and bombs. Approximately 303 of these were duds. Most of them were released from warplanes, six from helicopters and four from ships.

Nato recently released a list of its unexploded munitions in Libya, providing the latitude and longitude for each site, the weight of the ordnance and a description of the means of delivery (fixed-wing aircraft, helicopter gunship or naval vessel).

While this has provided demining organisations with vital information necessary to carry out their demining activities, specialists say this falls short of further information required to protect civilians and rid the country of hazards.

Despite Nato’s sophisticated targeting sensors used by aircrews to record infrared video of the impact of a missile or bomb, it has so far refused to provide exactly where weapons struck and when they failed to function properly.

This information would enable governments and mine-clearing organisations to alert the public to places of risk and to focus efforts on removing high-explosive remnants of war. Without this information UXOs, some of them containing toxic propellants, pose a threat to accidental discovery by civilians.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2012.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Africa, Featured, Middle East, Politics, Unrest Tagged With: , ,

Instability Reigns in Post-Gaddafi Libya

August 18, 2012 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IDN

By Bernhard Schell

IDN-InDepth NewsReport

AMMAN (IDN) – A new report paints a rather gloomy picture of post-Gaddafi Libya: fighting between tribes, ethnic groups and rival militia has accounted for instability at a local level; and flare-ups continue to occur in the country’s hubs of Benghazi and Tripoli. This has made travel more dangerous and the risk of assets being damaged or looted greater.

Reports gathered by the UK-based risk analyst Maplecroft, point to "a noted increase in violent incidents" in recent weeks in both Tripoli and Benghazi. Also, serious clashes have in the meantime broken out in recent months in the west of the country around the Nafusa mountain areas and in the south-eastern Kufra basin.

The proliferation of heavy and light weapons continues to undermine stability and the prevalence of unexploded ordinance (UXO) poses a risk to business operations when travelling in the country.

A report published in August 2012 by Harvard University’s International Human Rights Clinic, described the country as being "awash in weapons, ranging from bullets and mortars to torpedoes and surface-to-air missiles". It also describes how much of the ordinance left over from the uprising is "often unsecured and unstable."

Given that there remains insufficient capacity to tackle the problem and government coordination still remains weak, the risk to the security of Libyans is described as "significant". Moreover, oil and gas companies in particular are said to be facing the potential security risk of UXO in and around their operations and may have to embark on costly de-mining programmes,

Moreover, many militias and individual Libyans are unwilling to part with their arms. As such, disputes can rapidly turn violent with the use of heavy weaponry. Such escalation poses a particularly high human security risk in more densely populated urban areas.

For instance, on August 4 a gun battle took place between market vendors in Tripoli who were vying for selling space. A car bomb was also widely reported to have exploded in the same area, although local reports claim that the car exploded after being hit by TNT (of a type frequently used in fishing) which was hurled by individuals involved in the dispute and was therefore not a separate incident. One Tunisian national is reported to have been severely wounded.

According to the report, concern persists that Libya’s still embryonic security forces are ill equipped to tackle the variety of challenges they now face, making the security outlook for the country uncertain in the short to mid-term. Libya’s police do not have the capacity to patrol the streets, and the incidence of petty crime is on the rise. Many also lack professionalism and awareness and the case in early July 2012 of 140 Libyan police trainees rioting in Jordan and setting fire to an aircraft hangar over their flight being delayed may be indicative of this. Efforts, such as the recent agreement with Turkey to provide training to security forces to address these shortcomings are notable steps forward though.

At the same time, security forces are likely to be challenged by militias who may be reluctant to cede to their authority. Although militias have in some cases been critical in keeping the peace and in areas such as Misrata helped restore order and helped challenge corruption in and around the ports, they nevertheless remain unaccountable.

There are multiple examples submitted by human rights organisations of militias contributing to instability and carrying out human rights abuses. Equally, although the Libyan army has played a key role in rooting out groups suspected of carrying out or planning bomb attacks and intervened in violent inter-communal disputes, much work needs to be done before it becomes a unified national army. In addition to the army there exists the Supreme Security Committees (SSC) and the Libyan Shield Forces (LSF), the former falling roughly under the auspices of the Ministry of Interior and the latter the Ministry of Defence.

Mixed signals

Nevertheless, there are encouraging signs that tribal and community leaders are lending their support to the army and the fact that the July National Assembly elections – which saw some 13,000 soldiers and tens of thousands of security personnel successfully organised – were carried out peacefully is a positive sign.

However, oversight of the operation was entrusted to the SSC, an organisation which comprises between 90,000 and 100,000 former revolutionary fighters. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace describes the SSC (alongside the LSF) as having ‘rapidly become a force unto themselves’ which ‘overshadow the regular police and national army’. Research by the University of Oxford published in July 2012 argues that between 75-85% of the weapons stockpiles and ‘seasoned fighters’ in Libya are not controlled by the government. The research note points out that in Misrata for instance, ‘236 distinct armed groups are registered with the Misratan Union of Revolutionaries, accounting for almost 40,000 brigade members’.

"Whilst helpful in stabilising the country in the short term, the spread of parallel security institutions whose relations to the army and police remains ambiguous could develop into a more profound issue in the future," says Maplecroft, adding: "This will likely lead to rivalry and a lack of cooperation that will hinder regular security forces’ ability to operate effectively."

Indeed, a cause for concern is that the SSC has incorporated brigades such as the Salafi-linked Abu Salim Martyrs’ Brigade which is enforcing security in Derna. The latter is perceived as being a ‘thuggish’ group well known for carrying out vendetta attacks against security officials linked to the former regime. The LSF, which is mandated to quell tensions in the Zintan, Kufra and Sabha areas, is also accused of ‘inflaming tensions in these areas, either through heavy-handedness, such as its indiscriminate shelling of Kufra and its forced evictions of ethnic Tabu from that city in April’. In many cases, commanders’ also have family and affiliated tribal members directly involved the conflict and are therefore far from impartial peacekeepers.

Benghazi: Increasingly volatile

According to the report, recent attacks against Western targets in the city of Benghazi are nevertheless a clear cause for concern, although it is too early to tell whether this marks the beginning of a sustained campaign of attacks against ‘Western’ targets. Incidents include the U.S. diplomatic mission office being attacked with a home-made bomb on June 5 in response to the killing of al-Qaeda leader Abu Yahya al-Libi (a Libyan citizen) in Pakistan.

A convoy carrying the British ambassador to Libya was also hit by a rocket propelled grenade on June 11. Two attacks against the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) – with the latest occurring on the May 22 – have also taken place in Benghazi. However, attacks against the IRC have not been limited to Benghazi and have also taken place in Misrata. Following the latest rocket and grenade attack on August 5, 2012 – though none were harmed – the IRC declared that it is suspending operations in Benghazi and Misrata.

The recent string of kidnappings, small bomb explosions, grenade attacks and discovery of explosive devices in Benghazi underscore the dangers inherent to travelling to this part of the country at present, says the report.

For instance, on July 29 a large bomb was discovered and diffused near the Tibesti Hotel – a hotel popular with visiting foreign dignitaries and businessmen. On July 31, gunmen kidnapped a seven member delegation of individuals from the Iranian Red Crescent who were heading to the Tibesti. Although alarming, there have been a string of bomb discoveries recently and locals claim that they were not detonated on purpose. As such it is widely thought the intention is to provoke fear and undermine security forces, rather than to carry out mass casualty attacks.

Nevertheless, attacks witnessed in recent months against members of the security forces and judiciary clearly demonstrate the existence of several armed militant group willing and able to carry out attacks. Recent incidents include several assassinations (in addition to unsuccessful attempts) against leaders within the security forces, the storming of Kowaifiyah prison on July 31, 2012 which freed the suspected killer of former rebel leader Abdel-Fattah Younis and several incidents involving small arms fire and grenades near security buildings. The uptick in violence has led residents of Benghazi to take to the streets in protest, demanding that security improve and the militia demobilise.

Assassinations

In the meantime, high-profile assassinations remain a key source of instability and exacerbate security concerns. Historic rivalries and jockeying for power is claimed to be behind a string of assassinations, with recent cases including a candidate for the Constituent Assembly, Khaled Abu Salah, who was assassinated near the oasis town of Ubari in the south-west of the country on May 15, 2012.

Then on May 26 Head of the Military Council for the Western Region Mukhtar Fernana survived an attempt on his life. Both incidents come shortly following the killing of former military governor of Tripoli General Albarrani Shkal on May 2, 2012 in an attack claimed by the pro-Gaddafi ‘Green Resistance’ militia.

The multiplicity of armed groups with various and competing agendas in Benghazi makes determining the motives behind the attacks difficult. However, inter-militia rivalries and the presence of dissident pro-Gaddafi supporters seeking revenge against defectors are plausible causes. Islamist groups are known to have a ‘hit list’ of 106 individuals who were linked to Gaddafi’s regime and further such attacks are therefore likely.

A clear precedent was set with the killing of former Gaddafi loyalist turned rebel military commander Abdel-Fattah Younis in July 2011. On June 22, 2012, the judge investigating the death of Younis was himself assassinated in Benghazi. Claims by the Libyan Observatory for Human Rights that the NTC itself was behind the killing would prove highly damaging if proved to be true. More recently, on July 28, 2012, former military intelligence officer Col. Suleiman Buzraidah was killed en route to a mosque in Benghazi, with commander of the Libyan ground forces General Khalifa Hafter narrowly surviving an attack on his life only a day later. This was most likely part of a string of ‘revenge’ attacks led by Islamist militias, with fingers pointing towards the Abu Salim Martyrs’ Brigade.

Long-standing disputes over land, family feuds and latent inter Arab/ Berber communal tensions have now become meshed with the corrosive issue of which side various tribes and towns took during the revolution, thereby locking communities into cycles of violence. Indeed, the rivalry between the Zintani and Mashashia long precede the uprising and centres on issues such as land disputes and the perception that the Mashashia benefitted from Gaddafi’s patronage and that they supported the former dictator during the revolution. Whilst the situation had, for a while, been brought under control on August 5, 2012, armed clashes left a further seven people dead following a heated argument in a market that had escalated out of control. As such, a climate of insecurity prevails in some locations and outbreaks of violence are likely to occur in an unpredictable and spontaneous fashion.

Tension in the south

The report says: "The violence in the south of the country in the Fezzan region and the Kufra basin has been underpinned by rivalry over smuggling routes. Such rivalries are unlikely to abate soon. The prevalence of heavy weaponry has nevertheless given such ‘turf wars’ a new intensity. In a similar manner to the tensions between Zintan and the Mashashia, the hostility between the sub-Saharan African Tebou tribe and the Arab Zaway tribe in and around Kufra precedes the Libyan revolution. The Tebou – widely considered to be the ‘original’ inhabitants of Libya supported the anti-Gaddafi movement given their history of oppression under Gaddafi."

However, the report adds, efforts by the NTC to re-assert security and control in the south have been largely unsuccessful and arguably backfired somewhat. For instance, in a bid to resolve the security issue in the south, as well as reward the Tebou for their support in the revolution, the NTC appointed a Tebou leader to oversee border security with Chad and Sudan and implicitly the contraband networks. This has angered the Zaway tribe, and re-ignited latent rivalry.

Other hotspots in the south ‘Fezzan’ region include the southern capital of Sabha and the ancient trading post of Ghadames. Foreigners travelling in this area could be targeted for kidnap to ransom given widespread poverty in the region. This risk is particularly elevated given the prevailing sense of lawlessness reported in the area and the proximity to Mali where a Tuareg rebellion has raised fear that a similar push for secession could occur. [IDN-InDepthNews – August 16, 2012]

2012 IDN-InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

This article should not be republished or redistributed without the permission of the original author or copyright holder.


Filed Under: Middle East, Report, Security, Unrest Tagged With: ,

Pockets of Resistance As Rebels Claim Tripoli

August 22, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Correspondents*

DOHA and TRIPOLI, Aug 22, 2011 (IPS/Al Jazeera) – The head of Libya’s National Transitional Council (NTC) has announced the end of the Muammar Gaddafi era, while sporadic fighting continued across the capital, Tripoli.

Fighting and gun battles erupted in parts of Tripoli on Monday after tanks left Bab al-Azizyah, Gaddafi’s compound, to confront the rebel assault that gained control of much of the capital in a battle overnight.

Many of the streets in the centre of the city – where anti-government supporters had celebrated hours earlier – were abandoned as pockets of pro-Gaddafi resistance and the presence of snipers and artillery fire made the area dangerous.

Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr, who advanced into the city with rebel fighters overnight, said the security situation in the city was "tenuous", despite there being celebrations in the streets.

"There are some Gaddafi forces still putting up a fight," Khodr said. "And rebels still have one last push to make towards Bab al-Azizyah," Khodr added, saying that it was unclear when this advance would take place.

In Other Developments

Gaddafi’s three sons are in custody. Saadi was captured by rebels in Tripoli; Saif al-Islam, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court, was arrested in a village in western Tripoli; and Mohammed surrendered to rebel forces and spoke to Al Jazeera shortly afterwards.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez condemned NATO for demolishing Tripoli, while U.S. President Barack Obama said momentum against Gaddafi had reached a tipping point.

The Libyan diaspora communities are celebrating the advance of opposition forces.

Throughout the night, euphoric Libyan rebels moved into the centre of Tripoli and thousands of jubilant civilians rushed out of their homes to cheer the long convoys of pickup trucks packed with fighters shooting in the air.

Meanwhile, speaking at a press conference in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi, the NTC’s Mustafa Abdel Jalil acknowledged that Libya still faced many challenges, including maintaining law and order.

"Jalil spoke at length saying that it wasn’t going to be a bed of roses and a great number of challenges lay ahead for the Libyan people," Al Jazeera’s Jacky Rowland reported from Benghazi.

Rowland called Jalil "a very moderate voice, a voice calling for common sense and reason" at this sensitive time.

She said: "He called on people in Tripoli to respect people’s lives and people’s property… he also stressed that there should not be a case of people taking the law into their own hands."

Jalil said Gaddafi had left a legacy of violence against his own people and the world. He said he hoped that Gaddafi was captured alive so that he could be put on trial.

"We will provide him with a fair trial. But I have no idea how he will defend himself against these crimes that he committed against the Libyan people and the world," Jalil said.

Defiant Audio Messages

There has been no word on the location of Gaddafi himself. The Libyan leader has delivered a series of angry and defiant audio messages in recent days, vowing not to surrender.

In the most recent address, he acknowledged that opposition forces were moving into Tripoli and warned the city would be turned into another Baghdad. He also called on Libya’s tribes to rally to the city’s defence.

"How come you allow Tripoli, the capital, to be under occupation once again?" he said. "The traitors are paving the way for the occupation forces to be deployed in Tripoli."

Opposition forces and Tripoli residents were trying to maintain order in the city on Monday, said Khodr. "The people of Tripoli really are maintaining law and order in the areas that they are now controlling in Tripoli."

"They have set up checkpoints, are searching cars and looking for possible Gaddafi supporters, because ever since late last night they were worried about sleeper cells in the capital."

As the fighting intensified, it was reported that foreign journalists had been trapped inside the Rixos hotel where many correspondents have been based throughout the conflict.

"They are not allowed to leave the hotel because there are Gaddafi men in the area and around the area," Khodr said.

Opposition Hold Majority Control

An opposition fighter in Tripoli told Al Jazeera that only about 20 percent of the city was in the hands of Gaddafi supporters. "NATO air forces are above us, I am not sure if they are going to strike or if they are just here for surveillance."

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the NATO secretary-general, said NATO is ready to work with the Libyan NTC, and "our goal throughout this conflict has been to protect the people of Libya."

With Gaddafi’s grip on power apparently slipping, speculation has begun on where he may flee if Tripoli falls into rebel hands.

In a press conference, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, South Africa’s foreign minister, said Pretoria was not facilitating Gaddafi’s exit and did not know the 69-year-old leader’s current whereabouts.

Nkoana-Mashabane added that South Africa had no plans at the moment to recognise the rebel government if Gaddafi falls.

"The Libyans themselves must be given the chance to decide the future of their country and the future of Gaddafi," Nkoana-Mashabane said.

Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Johannesburg, Haru Matasa, said Angola and Zimbabwe had been cited as countries the embattled leader was most likely to go to.

*Published under an agreement with Al-Jazeera.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Middle East, Politics, Report Tagged With: ,

NATO Bombs Leave Gaddafi Unimpressed

July 28, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IDN

By Alexander Cockburn*

IDN-InDepth NewsViewpoint    
  

PETROLIA, USA (IDN) – After three and a half months of bombing and arms supply to various rebel factions, NATO’s failure in its efforts to promote "regime change" in Libya is now glaring.

Obviously NATO’s commanders are still hoping that a lucky bomb may kill Gaddafi, but to date the staying power has been with the Libyan leader, whereas it is the relevant NATO powers who are fighting among themselves.

The reports from Istanbul of the deliberations of NATO’s Contact Group (on July 15) have a surreal quality, as Secretary of State Clinton and British foreign minister Hague gravely re-emphasize their commitment to regime change and the strengthening of ties to the Transitional Council in Benghazi, while the humiliation of the entire NATO expedition is entering the history books as an advertisement of the dangers of political fantasy in the service of "humanitarian interventionism",  appalling intelligence work, illusions about bombing and air power, and some of the worst press coverage in living memory.

When Cameron vied with French president Sarkozy in early March in heading the charge against Gaddafi, no murmur of caution seems to have disturbed the blithe mood of confidence in Downing St. It was as though Blair’s blunders and miscalculations in Iraq, endlessly disinterred in subsequent years, had never been.

Cameron, like Sarkozy, Clinton and Obama  presumably had intelligence assessments of the situation in Libya Did any of them say that Gaddafi might be a tougher nut to crack than the presidents of Tunisia or Egypt, might even command some popular support in Tripoli and western Libya, historically at odds with Benghazi and the eastern region? If they did, did they pay any attention?

PROPAGANDA

The Western press, along with al-Jazeera, was no help. The early charges of Gaddafi committing "genocide" against his own people or ordering mass rapes were based on unverified rumour or propaganda bulletins from Benghazi and have now been decisively discredited by reputable organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Any pretensions the International Criminal Court might have had to judicial impartiality has been undermined by the ICC’s role as NATO’s creature, rushing out indictments of Gaddafi and his closest associates whenever NATO’s propaganda agenda has demanded it.

All history shows that the dropping of thousands of bombs and missiles, with whatever supposed standards of "pin point accuracy", never elicits the enthusiastic support of civilians on the receiving end, even if a certificate of humanitarian assistance and merciful intent is stamped on every projectile. Recent pro-government rallies in Tripoli have been vast. Libya has a population of about six million, with four million in Tripoli. Gaddafi barrels around the city in an open jeep. Large amounts of AK-47s have been distributed to civilian defence committees. Were they all compelled to demonstrate by Gaddafi’s enforcers? It seems unlikely.

MISJUDGEMENTS

Another pointer to NATO’s misjudgements has been the heavy-handed dismissal of charges from African, Russian and even leaders of NATO countries such as Germany that the mandates of two UN security council resolutions passed in February and then March 17 – protection of civilian populations – were being brazenly distorted in favour of efforts to kill Gaddafi and install the ramshackle “provisional government” in Benghazi – a shady bunch from the getgo.

In early March, Sarkozy, languishing in the polls, believed the counsel of "new philosopher" Bernard-Henri Lévy, after the latter’s March 6 excursion to Benghazi, that Libya and its oil were up for grabs. On March 11 Sarkozy took the precipitate step of recognizing the Benghazi gang as the legitimate government of Libya and awaited Gaddafi’s collapse with a confident heart.

In a hilarious inside account of the NATO debacle, Vincent Jauvert of Le Nouvel Observateur has recently disclosed that French intelligence services assured Sarkozy and foreign minister Juppe "from the first [air] strike, thousands of soldiers would defect from Gaddafi. They also predicted that the rebels would move quickly to Sirte, the hometown of the Gaddafi and force him to flee the country. This was triumphantly and erroneously trumpeted by the NATO powers which even proclaimed that he had flown to Venezuela.  By all means opt for the Big Lie as a propaganda ploy, but not if it is inevitably going to be discredited 24 hours later.

"We underestimated al-Gaddafi," one French officer told Jauvert. "He was preparing for forty-one years for an invasion. We did not imagine he would adapt as quickly. No one expects, for example, to transport its troops and missile batteries, Gaddafi will go out and buy hundreds of Toyota pick-up in Niger and Mali. It is a stroke of genius: the trucks are identical to those used by the rebels. NATO is paralyzed. It delays its strikes. Before bombing the vehicles, drivers need to be sure they are whose forces are Gaddafi’s. ‘We asked the rebels to a particular signal on the roof of their pickup truck, said a soldier, but we were never sure. They are so disorganized …’"

When collapse did not arrive on schedule the French government breezily confirmed earlier this month (July) it was shipping and air-dropping dropping arms supplies to Libyan rebel groups. We can safely assume Britain has its own clandestine operations in train, though the capture of the SAS/MI6 unit by Libyan farmers was not an inspiring augury.

FALLING APART

The NATO coalition is now falling apart, though disclosure of this development has been muted to non-existent in the U.S. press. French defence minister Gerard Longuet gave an interview (early July) to a French TV station saying that military action against Libya has failed , and it is time for diplomacy: "We must now sit around a table. We will stop bombing as soon as the Libyans start talking to one another and the military on both sides go back to their bases.’ Longuet suggested that Gaddafi might be able to remain in Libya, ‘in another room of the palace, with another title’."

If Longuet’s startling remarks were for local consumption on the eve of an Assembly vote, it clearly came as a shock to Cameron and Secretary of State Clinton. To heighten the impression of a civil war in NATO Cameron and Clinton rushed out statements asserting the ongoing goal of regime change, and that Gaddafi’s departure was a sine qua non, as demanded by the Benghazi gang.

But Berlusconi, his country the objective of tens of thousands of refugees from the fighting and from economic dislocation in Libya is now saying he was against the whole NATO adventure from the start. He may decline to renew in the fall current basing agreements in Italy for the NATO intervening powers. Germany has always been unenthusiastic. Initially, France and Britain nourished hopes of close military liaison but that soon collapsed for all the usual reasons – inertia, suspicion and simple incompetence.

Sarkozy’s suspicions of Germany and Turkey were apparently so intense, according to Le Nouvel Observateur that he called for the side-lining the Turkish and German officers present in the command structure of NATO, on the grounds that they could undermine the war given Berlin and Ankara’s distaste for the whole exercise. Normal guidelines dictate that when the supreme commander of NATO, an American general and his No. 2, a Briton, are on leave, the No. 3, is to be a German. Sarkozy had this sequence nixed.

DOUBLE GAME

Obama has been playing a double game, reflective of domestic pressures and political priorities. At the start, the rush to the UN Security Council was very much Secretary of State Clinton’s initiative. In political stature early to mid-February Obama was at his nadir. There was growing talk of a one-term presidency. Clinton rushed into what she perceived as a tempting vacuum, perhaps even began to entertain some hopes of accelerating Obama’s decline and proffering herself as a potential contender in 2012. Obama, still fighting the "wimp" label, swiftly endorsed the NATO mission and defied challenges as to its constitutional propriety. Clinton soon thereafter announced she was not particularly interested in staying in national politics after 2012.

In terms of equipment the U.S. has been crucial. According to one French general cited by Le Nouvel Observateur, “33 of 41 tanker aircraft used in the operation are American, most of the AWACS as well, all the drones as well, as 100 per cent of anti-radar missile and laser guidance kits for bombs. And that’s not all. The main means of command and control of NATO as the huge bandwidth for transmitting all the data is American." The Director of Military Intelligence, General Didier Bolelli, revealed that over 80 per cent of the targets assigned to the French pilots in Libya was designated by U.S.! "They give us just enough so that we do not figure we were breaking," says one diplomat.

SUEZ DEBACLE

Those whose memories stretch back to the Suez debacle of 1956 might recall that Eisenhower simply ordered the British, French and Israeli forces to abandon the effort to overthrow Nasser. We could well be seeing a less overt rerun of that conclusive demonstration of post World War II U.S. dominance, with the Obama administration making the point that any effort at asserting European primacy in the Mediterranean region is doomed to failure.

Before his retirement Defence Secretary Gates took the opportunity to twist the knife in a speech in Brussels: "The mightiest military alliance in history, is . . . into an operation against a poorly-armed regime in a sparsely populated country – yet many allies are beginning to run short of munitions, requiring the U.S., once more, to make up the difference." He said ominously, "future U.S. political leaders. . . may not consider the return on America’s investment in NATO worth the cost."

Even if Obama is in fact wholeheartedly for regime change in Libya the political temperature here does not favour the sort of escalation – hugely costly and much against the public mood – required in the wake of the failure of the bombing campaign.

What next? The air is thick with speculations about a brokered settlement, salted with hopeful bleats from the Americans and British that Gaddafi is on the verge of collapse, that he is running out of fuel, that the rebels are tightening the noose around Tripoli, that the Russians re brokering some sort of a face-saving deal. It seems a better bet to recognize that after four and a half months, NATO and the interventionists are being humiliated.

* Alexander Cockburn is editor of CounterPunch is a freely accessible website and a Newsletter, a six page publication solely for subscribers. This is an abridged version of an article that appeared on July 15, 2011 on http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07152011.html. The views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of IDN editors or editorial board. (IDN-InDepthNews/28.07.2011)

2011 IDN-InDepthNews | Analysis That Matters

This article should not be republished or redistributed without the permission of the original author or copyright holder.


Filed Under: Analysis, Conflict, Middle East, Politics Tagged With: , , ,

U.S.: Obama’s Claim of Libya War Powers Widely Disputed

June 19, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Jim Lobe

WASHINGTON, Jun 17, 2011 (IPS) – President Barack Obama’s claim that U.S. military operations against Libya should not be subject to the War Powers Act and do not require Congressional approval is drawing heavy fire from friends and foes alike.

In a 38-page report submitted to Congress earlier this week, White House and State Department lawyers contended that the Act did not apply because Washington’s intervention does "not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve U.S. ground troops".

But that claim went over like a lead balloon with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who – while most are unlikely to pull the plug on Washington’s three-month-old military involvement – have been unable so far to agree on a resolution authorising the operations.

Senator Dick Durbin, one of the administration’s most loyal and effective allies in Congress, became the latest Democrat to desert Obama on the issue when he insisted Friday that the U.S. air war against the government headed by Muammar Gaddafi did indeed fall under the Act and that Congress should vote to authorise it.

The ‘New York Times’ also joined the fray Friday, warning in its lead editorial that "[i]t would be hugely costly – for this country’s credibility, for the future of NATO and for the people of Libya – if Congress were to force President Obama to abandon military operations over Libya… However, Mr. Obama cannot evade his responsibility, under the War Powers Act, to seek Congressional approval to continue the operation".

Originally approved by Congress over then-President Richard Nixon’s veto, the 1973 law was designed to end the decade-long U.S. military intervention in Vietnam and establish curbs on the executive branch’s ability to engage U.S. forces in conflicts abroad without seeking Congressional authorisation or a declaration of war.

The Act requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing the U.S. into imminent or ongoing "hostilities". It also requires him to end operations within 60 to 90 days unless Congress gives him the authority to continue, or extends the deadline. In the Libya case, the 90-day period will end Sunday.

Until now, every president, beginning with Nixon himself, has argued that the Act is unconstitutional because it infringes on the president’s authority as "Commander-in-Chief". At the same time, however, they have been careful to comply with the Act’s notice requirement – as Obama did two days after deploying U.S. forces over Libya.

At other times, presidents either received authorisation to take military action, as George W. Bush did in 2002 before invading Iraq several months later, or construed the appropriation of money by Congress for purposes of conducting operations as an implicit authorisation, as Bill Clinton did in the case of the 1999 Kosovo War.

When specific authorisation was not forthcoming – as when Ronald Reagan sent military advisers to El Salvador in 1982, when U.S. naval vessels provided served as escorts for Kuwaiti oil tankers during the Iran-Iraq War, or, most recently, during the Kosovo War against Serbia – lawmakers sued the government to enforce the Act’s terms.

In each case, however, the courts ducked the issue on procedural, rather than constitutional grounds, which is likely to be the fate of a new lawsuit filed this week by a bipartisan group of ten congressmen – led by Democrat Dennis Kucinich and Republican Walter Jones – asking the courts to force Obama to withdraw U.S. military forces from the Libyan operation because he did not comply with the Act.

In the Libya case, Obama has not taken the traditional position that the Act is an unconstitutional infringement on his power, but has rather sought to downplay the U.S. role in the operation, which, after being led by Washington during the first days, was formally transferred to NATO.

Echoing this week’s report, Obama’s spokesman, Jay Carney, stressed that Washington’s role was "constrained and limited" and that the operation itself did "not amount to hostilities" as defined by the Act.

But that justification has drawn widespread scorn, particularly given the level of U.S. involvement compared to the half dozen other NATO members that are actively engaged in the conflict.

Indeed, the same administration report that included the legal rationale for not complying with the Act said its Libya-related military operations – which, since the first week of the intervention, have consisted mainly of aerial surveillance, targeting information, refuelling costs, and logistical support – have so far cost more than 700 million dollars. Current expenditures are running at roughly 10 million dollars a day.

Moreover, U.S. warplanes, while not engaged directly in combat, are carrying out about one quarter of total NATO sorties, while Predator drones have been striking targets on the ground.

While the original justification for U.S. involvement was the protection of civilians, administration officials, including Obama, have made it increasingly clear that the operation is designed to oust Gaddafi from power.

"They are involved in a war, and the fact that they are in a support role, that I don’t think is dispositive of the War Powers Resolution debate," Jules Lobel, an expert on the War Powers Act, told the Washington Post this week.

Moreover, the administration’s position that, because its military personnel are not at risk, the Act does not apply could be used by presidents to greatly expand their ability to involve Washington in overseas military adventures.

"Carving out an exception for drones or airstrikes would be a dangerous precedent, especially in an era when so much fighting can be done from the air and by remote control," the ‘New York Times’ noted Friday.

But, aside from the legal issues, the political reasons for compliance with the War Powers Act loom large, particularly given widespread public scepticism about the Libya operation.

"Military operations of this significance, with far-reaching consequences on our military, security, and relations with other nations, require the clear support of the American people," noted the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Richard Lugar, in a statement Thursday in which he asked that the Committee Chairman, Senator John Kerry, schedule hearings on Libya and the War Powers Act. These hearings are now tentatively scheduled for Jun. 28.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Commentary, Conflict, Geopolitics, Politics, United States Tagged With: , , , ,

Arab Spring Solidarity Defies National Boundaries

May 25, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Jasmin Ramsey

VANCOUVER, May 25, 2011 (IPS) – Ever since the ousting of Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, ordinary citizens have been leading uprisings all over North Africa and the Middle East against unwanted rulers. But what is now known as the "Arab Awakening" is not confined to people resisting within their own borders. Some Arabs are helping the fight in neighbouring countries too.

Sameh Saeed, a 26-year-old Egyptian orthopedic surgeon, was among the thousands of protestors who braved tear gas and water cannons during the famous battle on Kasr al-Nil Bridge in January. He also helped take Tahrir Square and camped there at night until Hosni Mubarak stepped down.

But even while acknowledging Egypt’s long road ahead, on Feb. 24, Saeed and two other Egyptian doctors arrived in Libya on a medical convoy organised by the Arab Medical Union.

"After our revolution we understood the meaning of freedom," he told IPS in a telephone interview from Cairo last weekend. "And when you see people in other countries right next to you fighting for the exact same purpose, you can’t just sit back and watch."

In the first five days of violence in February, an estimated 100-250 people were killed in the northern city of Benghazi. During that same time, Médecins Sans Frontières reported an influx of 1,800 injured taken to medical centres around the city.

While MSF noted that Benghazi’s main medical centres were "well- equipped" prior to the conflict, emergency team member Simon Burroughs said the city’s healthcare workers were overwhelmed during the heaviest fighting.

A substantial number of foreign health workers who were in the country prior to the conflict – the largest number existing in the nursing sector – fled the violence, leaving Libyans to fill the gaps.

According to Ryan Calder, a PhD Candidate from UC Berkeley in the United States who travelled through eastern Libya in March and April, there are several reasons for the large number of foreign care workers there.

"Some foreign doctors and Libyans I interviewed said healthcare centres hire foreign staff because there is a perception that the quality of medical training in Libya is not as good as it should be," he told IPS.

Calder also says that having a large number of foreign nurses is common among many Arab oil-rich countries. "They are often highly qualified for cheaper," he said.

Libya’s healthcare system isn’t popular among the population. Calder found "many people blaming Muammar Gaddafi in particular for not providing an adequate medical system."

Libyans also complain about the high cost of good care and often travel to neighbouring Tunisia or Egypt for procedures instead.

Both Calder and health NGOs noted a shortage of local specialised health workers during the conflict, an important requirement during critical health situations and a vacuum Saeed helped fill.

After Benghazi, Saeed and his colleagues took their needed expertise to the besieged city of Misrata. In April, 1,000 people were reportedly killed with several thousand injured since March.

Saeed arrived when part of the city was still under the control of pro-Gaddafi troops. "There was hundreds of mercenaries in the streets and snipers everywhere," he told IPS.

The emergency health situation in Misrata was much worse than what he’d seen in Benghazi. "Some days while I was operating they didn’t have enough time to sweep blood off the floor," he recalled.

In April, Human Rights Watch reported indiscriminate attacks on civilians in Misrata by Gaddafi’s forces. According to emergencies director Peter Bouckaert, "Libyan government forces have repeatedly fired mortars and Grad rockets into residential neighbourhoods in Misrata, causing civilian casualties."

Saeed says he operated on civilians in both Benghazi and Misrata, but the injuries sustained by the victims in Misrata were the worst he’s ever seen.

One of his patients included a six-year-old girl who ended up losing two younger siblings and a leg. "It was horrible seeing so many injured women and children wounded by Grad rockets and shells in front of you," he said.

While fighting continues in Misrata, rebel fighters have expanded their hold on the city. After the emergency health situation stabilised there in late April, Saeed returned to Cairo, but only to get a visa from Tunisia which will allow him to cross over into the western Zintan city.

Most of Libya’s Western mountains have been under rebel control, but Gaddafi’s forces have been launching a recent major offensive there. The difficult terrain has made it hard for health workers to reach it and the health situation is still unknown.

All over Libya, foreign members of the press and health workers have been reportedly targeted by Gaddafi’s forces. In Misrata, Saeed says doctors were targeted while in ambulances and he described instances where he thought he was going to die too.

"One day I had to perform an operation while a gun battle was happening in the room beside me in Misrata," he said.

But despite worried complaints from his family and university who are urging him to get back to his residency, Saeed is determined to take his medical skills where they’re most needed.

"I’ve been working in Egypt for the past three years, but I’ve never seen anything like what I saw in Misrata…you feel that you’re being useful. That makes it worth all the risk," he said.

While waiting to get back into Libya, Saeed is following developments of the Egyptian revolution, debating next steps with other activists. He also says he’s not at all tired despite going days without adequate food and water in Misrata.

"In Libya and in Egypt there is still so much work to do," he said.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Featured, Middle East, Politics Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Libya Group Agrees ‘Trust Fund’ for Rebels

April 13, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Correspondents*

DOHA, Qatar, Apr 13, 2011 (IPS/Al Jazeera) – The international contact group on Libya has agreed to set up a temporary "trust fund" to help the international community channel assets to the opposition Transitional National Council in Benghazi.

In a statement issued at the conclusion of Wednesday’s one- day summit in Doha, Qatar, the group united to call on Libya’s longterm leader Muammar Gaddafi to step down.

"Gaddafi and his regime has lost all legitimacy and he must leave power allowing the Libyan people to determine their own future," the group said.

The financial mechanism being set up will allow international donations to be made – possibly from frozen assets of the Gaddafi administration – and made directly available to Gaddafi’s opponents.

The group warned that up to 3.6 million people in Libya could require humanitarian assistance as the result of weeks of fighting in the country.

Members of the group have called for more pressure to be exerted against Gaddafi’s regime, but they disagree on whether to arm the rebels seeking to eject him.

Al Jazeera correspondent James Bays said some participants had "deep concerns" about providing Libyan rebels, who are fighting to topple Gaddafi from power, with access to funds.

"I spoke to the German foreign minister [Guido Westerwelle] and he had concerns over whether it was legal or not," our correspondent said.

"Statements from the UK and Qatar have agreed that the situation in Benghazi is urgent. And most is due to a lack of cash – it’s not all about heavy weapons for frontline fighters; it’s also about being able to pay public servants and getting schools back open."

After the conference, Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber bin Muhammad Al Thani, Qatar’s prime minister, said that Gaddafi must step down.

"Those around him should advise him that it is in the best interests of Libya," he said. "This is the ideal scenario, for the safety of everyone – including himself and his family."

Sending weapons to Benghazi

The Qatari prime minister also didn’t rule out arming anti- Gaddafi rebels.

"Qatar starts by providing humanitarian supplies, including heating gas and other supplies. We have also taken 6,000 refugees. For all other needs, Qatar … will make things available for the Libyan people to defend themselves."

William Hague, British foreign secretary, told Al Jazeera that arming Benghazi-based fighters would not be contrary to international law.

"The U.N. resolutions do allow for the provision of weapons," he said. "But we are making our contribution through our own military, as well as providing non-lethal support, such as communications equipment."

He earlier told reporters that "the arms embargo applies to all of Libya, but it is appropriate to equip people with what is needed to protect themselves".

Franco Frattini, Italy’s foreign minister, went further.

"Gaddafi’s tactics are to put tanks in the streets – and we cannot have air strikes against people in the city streets, in the squares, in the highly populated areas," he said.

"Either we make it possible for these people to defend themselves, or we withdraw our claims of support."

However, in an apparent rift between EU partners on Libya, Steven Vanackere, the Belgian foreign minister earlier said his country was opposed to the idea.

"The U.N. resolution speaks about protecting civilians, not arming them," he said.

Qatar ‘an oil corporation’

The Libyan government has dismissed the talks and Qatar’s role in the ongoing conflict.

"We are very hopeful that the American people and the American government will not buy into the Qatari lies and Qatari schemes," a spokesman of the Libyan regime told reporters in Tripoli on Tuesday.

"Qatar is hardly a partner of any kind. It’s more of an oil corporation than a true nation," the spokesman said.

Among those who arrived in the country ahead of the Doha talks was Moussa Koussa, Libya’s former foreign minister, who fled to Britain last month. He did not take part in the formal meeting, but was understood to have met with various officials on the sidelines of the conference.

Mustafa Gheriani, a media liaison official for the opposition, said Koussa was "not connected to (the rebel) Transitional National Council in any way or shape".

Gheriani added that he was personally surprised to learn that Koussa was leaving Britain to attend the Qatar talks, and suggested that British officials should explain why he was going and in what capacity.

‘Free individual’

Koussa, the most prominent Libyan government defector, sought refuge in Britain on Mar. 30. A friend said he quit in protest at attacks on civilians by Gaddafi’s forces.

The former spy chief was questioned by Scottish police over the 1988 Lockerbie airliner bombing, which killed 270 people, but the British government said he was now free to travel.

In his first public statement since arriving in Britain, Koussa told the BBC on Monday his country could become "a new Somalia" unless all sides involved in the conflict stopped it from descending into civil war.

*Published under an agreement with Al Jazeera.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Conflict, Diplomacy, Finance, Middle East, Report Tagged With:

Libyan Exodus Shrinks Remittances

April 13, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Simba Russeau

CAIRO, Apr 13, 2011 (IPS) – The exodus of migrants streaming out of Libya due to ongoing unrest has highlighted the heavy dependence of some countries on remittances from their citizens working abroad. In several countries this flow has now become choked.

"With thousands returning home the economic impact of the unrest in Libya is that remittances will be reduced," Dr. Mizanur Rahman, economist and research fellow at the National University of Singapore told IPS.

"Most workers travel to the region under adverse payment systems, which means they need to pay anywhere between 2,000 dollars to 3,000 dollars to secure their visas. In order to raise the money they resort to various means like selling their land, and in the end when this money halts it disrupts the entire family economics."

Recent World Bank statistics indicate that developing countries got more than 325 billion dollars last year from migrant worker remittances, outstripping foreign direct investment and development assistance combined.

According to a recent survey carried out by the African Development Bank (ADB), remittances sent home by African migrants have quadrupled in the last 20 years. They hit the 40 billion dollar mark in 2010.

Massive land grab in some African countries, forcing those that would be growing food to feed their families off their lands, has resulted in large numbers getting onto rickety boats and risking their lives to try and migrate out.

Stable economies like Libya were a hub for migrants from African countries, Emira Woods, co-director of Foreign Policy In Focus at the Institute for Policy Studies based in Washington told IPS. Migrants headed to Libya, and out through there because they were unable to withstand huge increases in the price of food and staple goods back home.

"Remittances are this sleeping giant in terms of development finance that has awakened. They create a financial tie between people and their communities by helping to build clinics, schools, roads and other infrastructure development projects," says Woods.

"There are some efforts to harness more the strategic resources from remittances, which have created a space for governments to act independent of external actors like the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund (IMF) whose interest and loan conditions have failed to serve the needs of Africa."

Libya has been a major destination for migrant workers following the 1969 revolution led by Gaddafi against King Idris. Construction workers from Tunisia, teachers from Egypt and Palestine and healthcare workers from Yugoslavia and Bulgaria poured in to assist in rebuilding.

Two decades later, a second wave of migrants swept in, mainly from Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and West Africa, to take advantage of the relatively high salaries of almost 300 dollars per month for unskilled labour.

On the macro level, says Dr. Ibrahim Awad, Director of the Center for Migration and Refugees Studies at the American University in Cairo, remittances assist in reducing chronic trade deficits and contribute to balancing the economy in countries like Egypt due to their resilience and countercyclical nature. This helps sustain consumption and investment during economic downturns.

But, he says, the countries that sent labour now face an exodus of migrants fleeing violence in Libya. The countries face an increase in the demand of jobs as unemployed workers return. Reliance on remittances to spur economic activity as a means of reducing poverty is slowing down.

"The crisis highlights the dependence some migrant sending countries have on remittances. In some countries remittances constitute over 30 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) like in Egypt. Reliance on this money influx suggests that any reduction will mainly impact the household level as well as create external financing gaps, which are hard to fill," Dr. Awad told IPS.

With no end to unrest in sight, concerns are growing amongst some developing nations that turmoil in the region could spread to oil-rich Gulf states where foreign labour adds up to more than 11 million.

Instead of waiting for the rebellions to die down in order to send migrants to Libya again or redirect efforts in locating new markets, labour sending countries should adopt appropriate policy measures to end reliance on labour export, and create incentives that encourage their nationals to stay home, Dr Awad said.

"Migrant sending countries should not rely solely on migration as a means of solving unemployment. The issue of lack of jobs should be solved internally. Countries of origin should therefore put in place effective policies for the reinsertion of returning migrant workers into their labour markets by creating decent work where people live."

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Economy, Featured, Middle East Tagged With: , ,

Libyan Rebels Reject African Union Road Map

April 12, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Correspondents *

DOHA, Apr 12, 2011 (IPS/Al Jazeera) – Libya’s opposition Transitional National Council has rejected outright the African Union’s proposal to negotiate a way out from the country’s deepening crisis.

The Benghazi-based council, which is demanding an end to Muammar Gaddafi’s decades-long rule, said the "road map" set out by a delegation of five African presidents was "outdated", following the deaths and destruction wreaked in the past month since the proposals were first outlined.

"The demand of our people of our people from day one was that Gaddafi must step down," spokesman Mustafa Jabril said.

"Any initiative which does not include this key popular demand will not be regarded. Muammar Gaddafi and his sons should depart immediately."

Jabril threatened that pro-democracy fighters would march on Tripoli.

"We cannot negotiate the blood of our martyrs," said Jabril. "We will die with them or be rewarded with victory."

He also thanked the international community and coalition forces for their support, which he said had saved the lives of civilians.

Five-point plan

The road map was a five-point plan which called for a ceasefire and the protection of civilians, alongside the provision of humanitarian aid for Libyans and foreign workers in the country.

The plan also called for dialogue between the two sides, an "inclusive transitional period" and political reforms which "meet the aspirations of the Libyan people".

Al Jazeera’s Laurence Lee, reporting from Benghazi, summed up Jabril’s words as: "No deal."

"There’s a particular military style of strategy at work here – and that is that they’d rather ‘die on their feet than live on their knees’."

The African leaders met yesterday with Gaddafi, who they said "accepted" the proposals.

The African Union’s plan had been given a cautious welcome in capitals around the world, with British foreign secretary William Hague stating that any ceasefire agreement must meet the terms of UN resolutions in full.

Franco Frattini, Italian foreign minister, said it was unlikely Gaddafi would respect any ceasefire, "after the horrific crimes enacted".

And NATO’s secretary-general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, said that any ceasefire must be "credible and verifiable".

Rebels doubtful

Jacob Zuma, the South African president, said Tripoli had "accepted" the African Union”s plan for a ceasefire which would halt a NATO bombing campaign that destroyed 26 loyalist tanks on Sunday alone.

But anti-Gaddafi fighters doubted the Libyan leader would adhere to such a deal.

"The world has seen these offers of ceasefires before and within 15 minutes [Gaddafi] starts shooting again," Shamsiddin Abdulmolah, a spokesman for the Transitional National Council, told the AFP news agency.

Al Jazeera’s Laurence Lee, reporting from Benghazi, says the strategy of the council is that ‘they’d rather die on their feet than live on their knees’

They would negotiate a political transition to democracy with certain senior regime figures but only on the condition that Gaddafi and his sons leave the country, they said on Sunday.

People in Benghazi were asking whether the proposals were a "genuine attempt at conflict resolution" or "an attempt by people who have close economic and political ties to Gaddafi to try and shore up the appearance of legitimacy", our correspondent said.

The revolt against Gaddafi’s 41-year reign began as a wave of protests across the country in late February but soon escalated into a civil war after Gaddafi’s troops fired on demonstrators and armed fighters seized several eastern towns.

The battle for Libya’s third largest city, Misurata, continues, as Gaddafi’s troops shelled two neighbourhoods on Monday. The city has been the scene of fierce battles in recent weeks and has been largely closed off to reporters.

"Heavy and fierce fighting is now taking place at the eastern entrance to the city and in the centre … on Tripoli Street," a resident named Abdelsalam told Reuters by telephone on Monday afternoon.

Recapturing Ajdabiya

The government’s troops have also pushed the rebels back on the eastern front, launching a major attack on the town of Ajdabiya on Saturday before being repelled by rebel forces.

Libyans outside the airport echoed the rebels’ official demands, saying they appreciated the African Union’s efforts but wanted Gaddafi to step down.

"The main thing we want is for Gaddafi and his family to get out and to be judged… And we want the withdrawal of all troops from the towns," Azza Hussein, a doctor waiting with the crowds outside the airport, said.

"Gaddafi is a big liar, so we are afraid if there is a ceasefire he won”t follow it," Abdullah Barud, 17, another protester, said.

In the 1990s, Gaddafi oriented Libya away from the Arab world and towards the sub-Sahara, calling for a "United States of Africa"and cultivating close ties with a number of rulers and some rebel movements.

Libya has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in tourism, telecommunications, banking and agriculture across several sub-Saharan countries via the Libya Africa Portfolio (LAP).

The rebels have accused Gaddafi of deploying African mercenaries against them – without providing much hard evidence – and have said they would be raising the subject with the delegation.

*Published under an agreement with Al-Jazeera.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Conflict, Middle East, Politics, Report Tagged With: , , , ,

Gaddafi Accepts AU Plan to End Fighting

April 11, 2011 by

Global Geopolitics & Political Economy / IPS

By Correspondents *

DOHA, Apr 11, 2011 (IPS/Al Jazeera) – Muammar Gaddafi, the Libyan leader, has accepted a "road map" for a ceasefire with rebels, according to a delegation of African leaders.

The announcement followed a meeting between the leaders and Gaddafi on Sunday in Tripoli, the Libyan capital, just hours after NATO air raids targeted his tanks, helping the rebels push back government forces who had been advancing quickly towards their eastern stronghold.

The African Union (AU) delegation was due to meet the rebels on Monday.

The terms of the road map were unclear, including the matter of whether it would require Gaddafi to pull his troops out of cities as demanded by the rebels.

"We have completed our mission with the brother leader, and the brother leader’s delegation has accepted the road map as presented by us," Jacob Zuma, the South African president, said.

The AU mission, headed by Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, the Mauritanian president, arrived in Tripoli on Sunday.

Besides Zuma and Abdel Aziz, the delegation includes Amadou Toumani Toure, Denis Sassou Nguessou and Yoweri Museveni – respectively the presidents of Mali, the Republic of Congo and Uganda.

Gaddafi made his first appearance in front of the foreign media in weeks when he joined the AU delegation at his Bab al-Aziziyah compound.

The committee said in a statement that it had decided to go along with a road map adopted in March, which calls for an end to hostilities, "diligent conveying of humanitarian aid" and "dialogue between the Libyan parties".

Speaking in Tripoli, Ramtane Lamamra, the AU Commissioner for Peace and Security, said the issue of Gaddafi’s departure had come up in the talks but declined to give details.

"There was some discussion on this but I cannot report on this. It has to remain confidential," he said.

"It’s up to the Libyan people to chose their leaders democratically."

Matter of implementation

Al Jazeera’s Anita McNaught, reporting from Tripoli, said that Gaddafi’s acceptance of the road map was no surprise.

With all attempts at a ceasefire so far ignored by both sides, it remains to be seen whether the AU deal will be any different, she said.

"The devil is not in the detail, the devil is in the implementation," she said.

Neither is the AU proposing to send any kind of peacekeeping force.

When Zuma’s jet touched down in Tripoli, he was met by crowds of Gaddafi supporters, waving banners saying: "No to foreign intervention."

Nabila Ramdani, a French journalist and Middle East expert, said the situation with regard to Libya had reached not only a military but also a political deadlock.

"It’s quite worrying," she told Al Jazeera. "Unfortunately, my view about the African Union is that it will appear as not being a credible group of people to be in a position to broker a deal on behalf of Gaddafi.

Ahmad Bani, a rebel spokesman, rejected a negotiated outcome to the conflict.

"There is no other solution than the military solution, because this dictator’s language is annihilation, and people who speak this language only understand this language," he told Al Jazeera.

Tanks destroyed

On the battlefront, NATO aircraft destroyed 25 tanks on the outskirts of Ajdabiya and Misurata, helping to halt major assaults by Gaddafi’s forces.

NATO said it had hit 11 tanks outside Ajdabiya, which Gaddafi’s troops had earlier threatened to overrun, and 14 more on the outskirts of Misurata, a lone rebel bastion in western Libya which has been under siege for six weeks.

A Reuters reporter saw six burning hulks surrounded by 15 charred and dismembered bodies in two sites 1,000ft apart on Ajdabiya’s western approaches.

Opposition fighters said four of their men were killed in the battle for Ajdabiya.

Al Jazeera’s Sue Turton, reporting from just north of Ajdabiya, said the fighting was ongoing.

"We’re seeing plumes of smoke and constant shelling … There are pockets of Gaddafi’s forces in the city."

She said she had been told that there were patients in a hospital who appeared to have been shot by sniper fire.

She described the city as something of a "ghost town" as many residents have fled since fighting erupted a few weeks ago.

Rebels fought off an assault by Gaddafi’s forces on the besieged western city of Misurata on Saturday, losing up to 30 men.

Under attack

A rebel who identified himself as Abdelsalem told Reuters that Gaddafi’s troops had attacked Misurata on three fronts.

"Medical workers and rebels told me that at least 30 rebel fighters were killed," he said.

Mustafa Abdulrahman, a rebel spokesman, said Saturday’s fighting centred on a road to Misurata port, while NATO carried out several attacks on forces loyal to Gaddafi.

Abdulrahman praised what he called a positive change from NATO. Rebels have complained for days that NATO has been too slow to respond to government attacks.

NATO said apart from tanks and armoured vehicles, its jets had also struck ammunition stockpiles being used to resupply forces involved in the shelling of Misurata and other population centres.

Misurata, Libya’s third largest city, has been under siege by Gaddafi’s forces for weeks.

Rebels say people are crammed five families to a house in the few safe districts to escape weeks of sniper, mortar and rocket fire.

There are severe shortages of food, water and medical supplies and hospitals are overflowing.

Doctors said last week that 200 people had been killed in Misurata since fighting broke out there in late February.

* Published under an agreement with Al Jazeera.

All rights reserved, IPS – Inter Press Service, 2011.

This article may not be republished, broadcast, framed, or redistributed without the written permission of IPS – Inter Press Service. Republication of this material without permission from IPS, the copyright holder, constitutes a violation of United States and international copyright laws and may result in legal action.


Filed Under: Africa, Conflict, Diplomacy, Politics, Report Tagged With: , ,
«Older Posts