Yesterday, the UN Security Council, spurred on by the United States, passed
Resolution 1973 (2011) authorizing a no-fly zone (a
euphemism for war) over Libya.
According to Associated Press:
The resolution establishes "a ban on all flights in the airspace of the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in order to help protect civilians." It also
authorizes UN member states to take "all necessary measures ... to protect
civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack in the Libyan
Arab Jamahiriya, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation
force of any form on any part of Libyan territory."
The vote was 10-0 with five countries abstaining including Russia and
China, which have veto power in the council, along with India, Germany and
Brazil. The United States, France and Britain pushed for speedy approval.
Ostensibly, the resolution for a no-fly zone
was requested by the Libyan rebel's Transitional National Council and the
Arab League (AL).
Veteran Indian diplomat M K Bhadrakumar writes:
The plain truth is that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and
the European Union (EU) commanded AL to speak since they need a fig leaf to
approach the United Nations Security Council. . . .
The Western powers had earlier mentioned the AL and African Union (AU) in
the same breath as representing "regional opinion". Now it seems the AU
isn't so important -- it has become an embarrassment. African leaders are
proving to be tough nuts to crack compared to Arab playboy-rulers.
The Arab League resolution was rammed through by Amr Moussa,
Secretary-General of the Arab League, who hopes to succeed Hosni Mubarak as
Egypt's next president. Arab leaders, who depend upon the U.S. for their
continued existence, were not hard to persuade.
Syria and Algeria (Algeria shares a longer border with Libya than does
Tunisia), having opposed the imposition of a no-fly zone, apparently
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Prime Minister of Turkey, Nato's only Muslim member,
said he opposed foreign intervention and called for an immediate ceasefire.
The Arab League vote gave the U.S. the cover it wanted. Bloomberg reported:
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that since the Arab League
backed a no-fly zone over Libya there has been a "sea change" in
international opinion toward favoring the action. . . .
Russia and China, who have questioned a no-fly zone at the UN, are
reconsidering after the Arab League statement on Saturday, Clinton said.
The United Kingdom and France, eager to get in on the plunder of yet another
mainly Muslim state have been eager participants.
Award-winning, internationally syndicated columnist Eric Margolis had
"reported for weeks that Britain's elite Special Air Service (SAS) has been
rallying anti-Gadaffi forces in and around Benghazi, seizing desert oil
installations, and helping attack pro-Gadaffi forces."
In a March 25 email to this author, Margolis wrote, "it's clear to me that
anti-Gadaffi civilians broke into military stores and began fighting.
Britain's MI6 has been active for decades in stirring up Benghazi against
Gadaffi and may have played a role in current events."
Libya has the largest proven oil
reserves in Africa according to the U.S. Energy Information
French President Nicolas Sarkozy, facing a tough election, and accused by
Muammar Gaddafi's son that Libya helped to finance his election campaign in
2007, took advantage of the opportunity created by the Libyan rebellion to
divert attention from his own problems.
The behind-the-scene American role has been kept largely hidden from the
On March 16, 2011, I received an email from Radwan A. Masmoudi, President, Center for the Study of
Islam & Democracy (CSID), asking me to sign a letter urging President Obama:
. . . that with the recent unanimous vote of the League of Arab States,
numerous calls for such action from states within the region, as well as
wider calls from traditional American allies such as France and Britain for
such action, legitimate sanction for the speedy imposition of a no-fly zone
now exists and we call upon you now to assume a leading role in halting the
horrific violence being perpetrated by Colonel Gaddafi's forces
. . . to create a coalition that will impose as quickly as possible a
no-fly zone for all Libyan military aircraft over the full extent of
northern Libyan airspace.
The CSID letter was signed by hundreds of
"scholars" first among whom were Larry Diamond, Director, Center on
Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law, Stanford University; John L.
Esposito, Director, Al-Waleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding,
Georgetown University; Akbar Ahmed, Ibn Khaldun Chair of Islamic Studies,
American University; Francis Fukuyama, Institute for International Studies,
Stanford University; Michele Dunne, Carnegie Endowment for International
For Christians, specially Catholics, who signed the CSID letter, I have
a question: Is the war on Libya a Just War? I don't believe it meets the
Catholic church's criteria for a Just War.
For Muslims who signed the CSID letter I have the same question. According
to University of California professor Huston Smith, author of The World's
Religions: "The Koran's definition of a Holy War is virtually identical with
that of a Just War in the Canon Law of Catholicism."
No State or group of States has the right to intervene, directly or
indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal or external affairs
of any other State. Consequently, armed intervention and all other forms
of interference or attempted threats against the personality of the
State or against its political, economic and cultural elements, are in
violation of international law.
In violation of international law, U.S. Special Operations forces are now deployed in 75 countries, compared with
about 60 at the beginning of President Obama's term.
With hundreds of signatures on the letter, why I was asked to sign is a
mystery to me. The activities of CSID and its sponsors are less mysterious,
but less well known to the public.
CSID, established in 1999, has as its mission to "educate the public
concerning benefits of democracy in Islamic regions through conferences,
publications and internet."
In its tax returns, CSID lists as its principle program accomplishments:
democracy training workshops in Morocco, Tunisia, Jordan; establishing the
Network of Democrats, publishing a newsletter on the status of democracy in
the Arab world; organizing conferences, etc.
CSID appears to be funded entirely by the U.S. government -- when asked,
Masmoudi did not deny it. One of its officers or employees, Radwan Ziadeh,
lists his address at the National Endowment for Democracy
(NED) in Washington, DC.
Zalmay Khalilzad, US Ambassador to Iraq, Afghanistan, and the United Nations
-- who bears major responsibility for the disaster in Afghanistan and Iraq,
is on NED's Board of Directors.
NED has spent millions of dollars promoting 'color' revolutions. "NED was
established by the Reagan Administration in 1983, to do overtly, what the
CIA had done covertly, in the words of one its legislative drafters, Allen
Weinstein", according to Jonathan Mowat at the Centre for Research on
So when U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that since the Arab
League backed a no-fly zone over Libya there has been a "sea change" in
international opinion, she was basking in the result of NED's efforts to
promote "democracy" in states that have resisted U.S. efforts to plunder
The creation of a new state encompassing the oil producing parts of Libya is
a distinct possibility.
Libya, which has the highest
standard of living in Africa, is about to encounter democracy American
style -- corporations vote with their checkbooks, the rich get richer, the
poor get poorer.
Henry H. Shelton, Head US Special Forces: [The special forces are used] to
put down rebellions or to start one.--"60 Minutes," April 30, 1995 -- On October
1, 1997, Gen. Shelton became Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
[Today, the Washington Post reported unrest in Libya which the Libyans
believe is led by a Col. Khalifa Haftar based in the U.S. On May 17, 1991
the Washington Times reported that three hundred and fifty Libyans would
arrive soon in the United States. . . . the Libyans who arrived in the U.S.
in 1991 . . . were trained by our CIA to topple President Ghaddafi.
--Enver Masud, "Libya: Who's Terrorizing
Whom," The Wisdom Fund, March 26, 1996]
DOCUMENTARY: John Pilger, "The War On
Democracy," johnpilger.com, 2007 -- The National Endowment for Democracy
funded the 2002 coupe against the Hugo Chavez government in Venezuela - the same guys,
working through organizations such as the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID),
are involved in Libya.
[While the activists attending the Movements.org summit adhere to the
philosophies of "left-leaning" liberalism, the very men behind the summit,
funding it, and prodding the agenda of these activists are America's
[Their unexpected arrival prompted panic among the local militia, only
exacerbated by the discovery of weapons, explosives and ammunition
accompanying the soldiers.--James Kirkup, Nick Meo in Benghazi and Caroline
Gammell, "Libya: SAS
mission that began and ended in error," Telegraph, March 6, 2011]
Why not a no-fly zone over India where the government has been killing Kashmiris for decades, and Naxalites in
recent years? Or Israel when it was destroying Lebanon and Gaza?
[What this means for Western intervention is that we won't be liberating a
country from a universally despised dictator, we will be taking sides in a
civil war. Indeed, a civil war in which Gaddafi is not only the strongest
force but quite possibly the most popular one. Nobody wants to believe that,
but Gaddafi has not held onto power and so easily rolled up his opposition
simply because he has shipped in sub-Saharan mercenaries.--Daniel McCarthy,
Raj Strikes Back," amconmag.com, March 17, 2011]
[If all goes well for the globalists, this servile proxy Arab conglomerate,
after being marshaled to raid Libya on behalf of the West, will then be
organized and ready to turn its attention east toward Iran at the behest of
their globalist masters.
. . . America's leading "Neo-Cons" . . . latest "letter" is addressed to
President Obama under the title, "Foreign Policy Experts Urge President to
Take Action to Halt Violence in Libya."--Tony Cartalucci, "Egypt Arming Libyan Rebels," landdestroyer, March 18, 2011]
[Of course, if this revolution was being violently suppressed in, say,
Mauritania, I don't think we would be demanding no-fly zones. Nor in Ivory
Coast, come to think of it. Nor anywhere else in Africa that didn't have
oil, gas or mineral deposits or wasn't of importance in our protection of
Israel, the latter being the real reason we care so much about Egypt. . . .
[ . . . forces quickly materialized that were ready to do the dirty work of
the great powers. They were to be found in the figures making up the
so-called National Transitional Council, who not only guaranteed
international oil companies unhindered exploitation of the country's mineral
wealth, but also called for the bombing of their own country. The
Transitional Council is composed of senior officials of the old regime who
turned their backs on Gaddafi in response to the shift by the imperialist
Military intervention in Libya, whose energy resources have made it the
object of imperialist intrigues for decades, is being used both to secure
access to oil and to contain the revolutionary movements in the region . . .
A military presence in Libya . . . would help the major powers to
intimidate revolutionary movements throughout the Arab world.--"No to
imperialist intervention in Libya!," wsws.org, March 19, 2011]
[The Arab League on Sunday criticized Western military strikes on Libya, a
week after urging the United Nations to slap a no-fly zone on the oil-rich
North African state.--"Arab League criticizes Western strikes on
Libya," AFP, March 20, 2011]
Didn't Amr Moussa know what happened in Iraq when he requested the no-fly
zone over Libya? The U.S. military had been saying openly how the no-fly
zone would be implemented. Apparently, Amr Moussa's statement is intended to
improve his chances for being elected president of Egypt.
Missiles launched by U.S. 122, U.K. 2--ABC World News With David Muir,
March 20, 2011
George Galloway: "France killed a million
and a half Algerians, next door. Italy committed war crimes . . . killed hundreds of
thousands in Libya."
[The question is how much weaponry and training America and its allies can
get them in a short period of time. Luckily for the U.S., Egypt appears to
be facilitating the transfer. If Western governments don't already have
military trainers on the ground in Libya, I'd be amazed.--"Behind the
Libya War," thedailybeast.com, March 21, 2011]
[In the vote to authorize war against Libya, the U.S., Britain and France
were joined by Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Gabon, Lebanon, Nigeria,
Portugal and South Africa. Abstaining from the vote were five countries:
Brazil, Russia, India, China and Germany.
What do the five countries that registered their opposition to the Libyan
war have in common? They make up most of the great powers of the early
twenty-first century.--Michael Lind, "The Libyan War: Unconstitutional and illegitimate,"
salon.com, March 21, 2011]
[Africom is about the
Pentagon's militarization of Africa - suavely sold as "bringing peace and
security". It's all part of the time-tested Pentagon's full spectrum
dominance doctrine.--"The Odyssey
Dawn top 10," atimes.com, March 22, 2011]
[The GCC/Arab League astonishing dithering and hypocrisy is compounded by
the outright hostility of the African Union (AU) to the "coalition",
expressed by a communique from Nouakchott, Mauritania, calling for "an
immediate end to all attacks". The AU only demands that Gaddafi makes sure
"humanitarian aid" arrives for those who need it.
This explodes the myth that the "international community" is behind
Odyssey Dawn. The Arab dictatorships - which once again have sanctioned
an attack on a Muslim country - are scared to death of the backlash from
their populations if "collateral damage" balloons.
The Arab blogosphere is saturated with accusations that the UN and the Arab
League have sanctioned a shameless Western plot to get Libya's oil. The
African countries are mostly against it. The key emerging powers - Brazil,
India, Indonesia, Turkey - are not part of it. The four top BRIC members
(Brazil, Russia, India, China) all abstained from the UN vote.
China has been very much aware that in both Africa and South America - where
its business interests are now rivaling America's - support for the
"coalition" is minimal. And Russia has gone one step beyond; according to
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, "The resolution is defective and flawed ...
It allows everything. It resembles medieval calls for crusades."--Pepe
Escobar, "The West
bombs, the Arab League ducks," atimes.com, March 23, 2011]
[The resolution . . . was promoted by the French and United Kingdom
governments, but with a strong presence of the United States in the
background pulling the strings.--Curtis Doebbler, "Why the Attack
on Libya is Illegal," counterpunch.org, March 28, 2011]
[And what about the INC's new military commander, Khalifa Hifter - a former
Libyan army colonel who spent nearly 20 years in Vienna, Virginia, not far
from the Central Intelligence Agency in Langley? Progressives will love to
learn that the romantic "rebels" are now led by a CIA asset.--Pepe
Hillary of Libya," atimes.com, March 31, 2011]
[Only Nicolas Sarkozy saw the popular revolt that began in Libya on February
15 as an opportunity for political and diplomatic redemption.
. . . Yet the international air campaign against Gaddafi's forces might
never have happened without the self-appointed activism of French public
Levy, a left-leaning philosopher and talk-show groupie, who lobbied
Sarkozy to take up the cause of Libya's pro-democracy rebels.--Paul Taylor,
"Special report: The
West's unwanted war in Libya," Reuters, April 1, 2011]
[You invade Bahrain. We take out Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. This, in
short, is the essence of a deal struck between the Barack Obama
administration and the House of Saud.
. . . only nine out of 22 members of the Arab League voted for the no-fly
zone. The vote was essentially a House of Saud-led operation, with Arab
League secretary general Amr Moussa keen to polish his CV with Washington
with an eye to become the next Egyptian President.--Pepe Escobar, "Exposed:
The US-Saudi Libya deal," atimes.com, April 2, 2011]
[They include men such as Colonel Khalifa
Haftar, former commander of the Libyan army in Chad who was captured and
changed sides in 1988, setting up the anti-Gaddafi Libyan National Army
reportedly with CIA and Saudi backing. For the last 20 years, he has been
living quietly in Virginia before returning to Benghazi to lead the fight
Even shadier is the background of Abdul Hakeen al-Hassadi, a Libyan who
fought against the US in Afghanistan, was arrested in Pakistan, imprisoned
probably at Bagram, Afghanistan, and then mysteriously released. The US
Deputy Secretary of State, James Steinberg, told Congressmen he would speak
of Mr Hassadi's career only in a closed session.--Patrick Cockburn, "The shady
men backed by the West to displace Gaddafi," Guardian, April 3,
[A blockbuster Politico story on Al-Jazeera claims that the
Republican-oriented lobbying firm, Barbour, Griffith & Rogers (BGR), worked
on behalf of Qatar, as well as Al-Jazeera. But Loren Monroe, the spokesman
for the firm, is denying it, telling AIM, "We did not represent Al-Jazeera."
The charge that a prominent lobbying firm represented Al-Jazeera is
politically explosive not only because of the high-level Republican
connections, but because the "Barbour" in BGR is Mississippi Governor Haley
Barbour, a possible 2012 Republican presidential candidate.
Qatar sponsors and funds Al-Jazeera . . .
This "long-standing relationship" between BGR and Al-Jazeera (and Qatar)
became more direct and substantial when Ben Smith's Politico blog said that
the representation of Al-Jazeera was "part of their contract with Qatar in a
mid-2000s PR push to rehabilitate the controversial Arab network."--Cliff
Kincaid, "Republican ties to Al-Jazeera ignite
firestorm," smallgovtimes.com, April 21, 2011]
[Welcome to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), formed in 1981 by top dog
Saudi Arabia plus the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and
Oman. A more appropriate denomination would be Gulf Counter-Revolutionary
Council--Pepe Escobar, "The
counter-revolution club", atimes.com, May 28, 2011]
[The big prize is energy. Libya produced 1.6 million barrels of oil per day
before the war, or almost 2 percent of world output, and has enough reserves
to sustain that level of production for 77 years, according to BP. Qatar
would like to control a chunk of that oil supply as well as potentially
large Libyan gas exports to Europe which otherwise would effectively rival
Qatar's own deliveries. . . .
"To some extent they may be acting as a U.S. proxy. Washington wants to
achieve things but doesn't want to do it with its own hands," said a
London-based risk consultant who has European firms as clients.--Dmitry
Zhdannikov, Regan E. Doherty and Mohammed Abbas, "Special Report -
Qatar's big Libya adventure", Reuters, June 9, 2011]
[One of the main sources for the claim that Qaddafi was killing his own
people is the Libyan League for Human Rights (LLHR). The LLHR was actually
pivotal to getting the U.N. involved through its specific claims in Geneva.
On February 21, 2011 the LLHR got the 70 other non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) to send letters to President Obama, E.U. High
Representative Catherine Ashton, and the U.N. Secretary-General Ban-ki Moon
demanding international action against Libya invoking the "Responsibility to
Protect" doctrine. . . .
LLHR is tied to the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), which
is based in France and has ties to the National Endowment for Democracy
(NED). FIDH is active in many places in Africa and in activities involving
the National Endowment for Democracy in the African continent. Both the FIDH
and LLHR also released a joint communique on February 21, 2011. In the
communique both organizations asked for the international community to
"mobilize" and mention the International Criminal Court while also making a
contradictory claiming that over 400 to 600 people had died since February
15, 2011. This of course was about 5,500 short of the claim that 6,000
people were massacred in Benghazi. The joint letter also promoted the false
view that 80% of Qaddafi's support came from foreign mercenaries, which is
something that over half a year of fighting proves as untrue.
According to the General-Secretary of the LLHR, Dr. Sliman Bouchuiguir, the
claims about the massacres in Benghazi could not be validated by the LLHR
when he was challenged for proof.--Rachel Leven, "Human
rights imposters used to spawn Nato's fraudulent war",
voltairenet.org, October 17, 2011]
[A young French film-maker, Julien Teil, has filmed a remarkable interview
in which the secretary general of the Libyan League for Human Rights,
Slimane Bouchuiguir, candidly admits that he had "no proof" of the
allegations he made before the U.N. Human Rights Commission which led to
immediate expulsion of the official Libyan representative and from there to
U.N. Resolutions authorizing what turned into the NATO war of regime change.
Indeed, no proof has ever been produced of the "bombing of Libyan
civilians" denounced by Al Jazeera, the television channel financed by the
Emir of Qatar, who has emerged with a large share of Libyan oil business
from the "liberation war" in which Qatar participated.--Diana Johnstone,
"As the 'Humanitarian Warriors' Gloat... Here's the Key
Question in the Libyan War," Guardian, October 26, 2011]
[NED and Freedom House often work as a kind of tag-team with NED financing
"non-governmental organizations" inside targeted countries and Freedom House berating
those governments if they crack down on U.S.-funded NGOs.--Robert Parry, "CIA's
Hidden Hand in 'Democracy' Groups," consortiumnews.com, January 8, 2015]