Libya might be on the verge of witnessing a grave humanitarian crisis as western nations have stepped up their military operations ostensibly to wipe out Colonel Gaddafi’s forces at a time when several global humanitarian organisations are unable to sustain their operations because of lack of funds from rich countries.
The Libyan crisis appears to be a repeat of what happened in Iraq, when the coalition forces made swift military advances while humanitarian relief operations lagged far behind resulting in endless chaos and insecurity, analysts said.
The United Nations Humanitarian Agency on Friday issued a flash appeal for the $160 million while International Migration Organisation made a separate appeal for almost the same amount to evacuate and address the humanitarian needs of people fleeing Libya because of the fighting.
“IOM is issuing this third appeal for $160 million on Friday to provide critical humanitarian and evacuation assistance,” said Jemini Pandya, IOM’s spokesperson, maintaining that it is not able to deliver adequate assistance due to severe shortage of funds.
Consequently, it is unable to evacuate an additional 75,000 people who manage to escape the violence, she said. “The continued provision of humanitarian assistance such as food and medical attention at the border areas, travel health checks for all those being evacuated and health referrals for particularly vulnerable people in addition to providing reintegration assistance to some of the returning Tunisian and Egyptian migrants,” she said.
So far, IOM received pledges for about $44 million but no immediate delivery of funds. At this rate where bilateral and multilateral donors are not forthcoming funds, IOM will drastically scale down its operations, she cautioned. However, the UN Humanitarian Agency which also issued a flash appeal for the $160 million managed to secure 70 per cent of its appeal.
US President Barak Obama reportedly signed an order authorising covert support for anti-Gaddafi rebels.
Isn’t it sad that the US/Nato/UN/Arab League, ad nauseum, are quick to provide the military $, but, hesitant on real humanitarian $…?
Didn’t we just expend more than the $160 million that they’re requesting, on our opening salvo alone? Interestingly, US pulling Tomahawk missiles out of Libya combat…
Not being a ‘cruise missile liberal’, I’ve been extremely pessimistic over the ‘humanitarian
crusade mission’ to stop Ghadaffi’s brutal suppression. Many knowledgeable individuals have since stepped forward and stated our real intentions…
By Susan Lindauer, former U.S. Asset who covered Libya at the United Nations from 1995 to 2003
Who are we kidding? The United States, Britain and NATO don’t care about bombing civilians to contain rebellion. Their militaries bomb civilians every day without mercy. They have destroyed most of the community infrastructure of Iraq and Afghanistan before turning their sights on Libya. So what’s really going on here?
Hmmm… Great question! The ever-intrepid Pepe Escobar exposed ever more of the Oily linkage behind Libya…
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. Two diplomatic sources at the United Nations independently confirmed that Washington, via Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, gave the go-ahead for Saudi Arabia to invade Bahrain and crush the pro-democracy movement in their neighbor in exchange for a “yes” vote by the Arab League for a no-fly zone over Libya – the main rationale that led to United Nations Security Council resolution 1973. [...]
As Asia Times Online has reported, a full Arab League endorsement of a no-fly zone is a myth. Of the 22 full members, only 11 were present at the voting. Six of them were Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members, the US-supported club of Gulf kingdoms/sheikhdoms, of which Saudi Arabia is the top dog. Syria and Algeria were against it. Saudi Arabia only had to “seduce” three other members to get the vote.
Translation: 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.
Thus, in the beginning, there was the great 2011 Arab revolt. Then, inexorably, came the US-Saudi counter-revolution.
Humanitarian imperialists will spin en masse this is a “conspiracy”, as they have been spinning the bombing of Libya prevented a hypothetical massacre in Benghazi. They will be defending the House of Saud – saying it acted to squash Iranian subversion in the Gulf; obviously R2P – “responsibility to protect” does not apply to people in Bahrain. They will be heavily promoting post-Gaddafi Libya as a new – oily – human rights Mecca, complete with US intelligence assets, black ops, special forces and dodgy contractors.
It’s interesting to note that the CIA did and does know that many of the Libyan ‘rebels’ are AQIM members: The CIA’s Libya Rebels: 2007 West Point Study Shows Benghazi-Darnah-Tobruk Area was a World Leader in Al Qaeda Suicide Bomber Recruitment
Some more excellent background…. The CIA, the Libyan Rebellion, and the President…
Now, as Jeff Steinberg, editor of the Executive Intelligence Review, notes…
Press TV: There’s always talk of al-Qaeda bogeyman whenever there is any report on Yemen in the Western media. Yet this al-Qaeda affiliate was very quiet since the start of the revolution in Yemen. What does that show?
Steinberg: Al-Qaeda is the buzzword to justify any kind of criminal activity imaginable from military intervention to brutal suppression of a genuinely popular and peaceful revolt against a corrupt and completely bankrupt regime and of course the Saudis in particular have carried out a whole series of brutal campaigns violating the borders of Yemen over a long period of time using this al-Qaeda pretext.
It is noteworthy that according to Colonel Gaddafi in Libya the two main sources of the uprising there are the CIA and Osama Bin Laden so it is almost getting to be comical that this bogeyman is used to justify all kinds of illegal behavior. We are going to find out at some point in the very near future the Saudis are engaged in massive “rendition operations” going into certain neighborhood in Bahrain and picking people off the streets and this is a desperate effort on the part of [Persian] Gulf Cooperation Council countries to basically hold onto these Sunni regimes. It is not going to hold. Either there are going to be some very genuine and legitimate and verifiable concessions or one after the other these regimes are going to go under. The Libya situation has become more complicated by the fact that it is about the American and European interest in Libyan oil.
So that situation is somewhat different when you have a much larger criminal violation going on right now. The whole terms under which the UN Security Council resolution, which was halved with abstention rather than vetoes from Russian and china, has been proven to be a complete sham. The discussion among American and European leaders from day one was not about the humanitarian aid to the people in Benghazi but it was regime change, plain and simple. President Obama went on national television on Monday night and knowingly and systematically lied through his teeth about the nature of the operation was there. So al-Qaeda is the bogeyman of choice for justifying violation international law, and human rights and everything else.
To sum it up, Jeremy Scahill is right…
According to The Nation’s Jeremy Scahill, the US is worried that if President Ali Abdullah Saleh falls “the vacuum that would exist” in Yemen could be terrible for US counterterrorism operations. Scahill joined Martin Bashir on MSNBC to discuss why the US is intervening in Libya but refusing to take action in Yemen.
Saleh is a “thug,” says Scahill, someone whose snipers shoot protesters in the head. Yet, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wants a “political solution” to the growing instability in Yemen and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates claims it is not the US’s business to meddle in the internal affairs of Yemen.
Scahill says that “the Bush Administration created this theory that the world is a battlefield” and it therefore follows that the US can strike anywhere it sees a threat. The Obama Administration has not challenged this “theory” and has authorized a fair amount of covert violent actions.
We need another ‘Church Committee’ at the very least…