Tweet
Edward Teller first posted a story about this yesterday, but its not up on the front pages anymorem so, I need to hat tip him first by linking to it here.
Second, I want to add some more details that have come to my attention since he posted it. This story is important because it involves the potential use of US Military personnel in a theater of war where they may be harmed, and it involves the use of US tax dollars to pay for those forces. It also involves the right of an indigenous people, Libyans, to determine their future for themselves, and how they have risen up to oppose a brutal tyrant of over 40 years. Finally, this story involves the potential that our Commander-in-Chief and President, Barack Obama, may be lying through his teeth to us, the American people, and that NATO, the United Nations Security Council, and other European nations may also be doing one thing but claiming to do another.
Facts:
1. The UK Telegraph reported today that
African mercenaries hired by the Gaddafi regime to kill Libyan protesters would be immune from prosecution for war crimes due to a clause in this weekend’s UN resolution that was demanded by the United States.
2. The United Nations has imposed an arms embargo on the nation of Libya (Source here)
3. The Rebels have seized most of the port cities on the Mediterranean (meaning they will be the first ones to receive any ship-based weapons cargo…) (some information here)
4. The US is moving military hardware and assets into the Mediterranean, with the President saying (source here) (according to Slate Magazine):
President Obama said he is giving the U.S. military “full capacity to act, potentially rapidly,” if things get worse, reports the Washington Post. “I don’t want us hamstrung,” the president said Thursday, adding that he didn’t want “a situation in which defenseless civilians were finding themselves trapped and in great danger,” or “a stalemate that over time could be bloody.”
5. Yet, the Israeli government has authorized the Israeli company, Global CST, to finance and arm and supply Gaddafi with 50,000 African Mercenaries (from Uganda, Chad and other nations)!
Well, when those Israeli-funded mercenaries arrive in defiance of US military imposed embargoes, what will happen? Will the US look the other way? If the US only imposes an arms embargo on the rebels, but allows Israel to finance and arm and supply Gaddafi, then it will be clear that Obama lied, and that the use of US military force in the Mediterranean is to suppress the rebellion. Not to help it.
This is not a story we should ignore. It is a big f-ing deal for the US to move military assets out of the Persian Gulf, or Afghanistan, and into the Med.
Why? To secure the oilfields inLibya for western occupation. To secure Israeli geo-strategic goals in the mediterranean. To create a puppet regime in the region.
If I were counseling the Israeli government, my advice would be to stop making enemies of everyone around you and to start ensuring your “strategic depth” by instead forging PEACE AGREEMENTS with your neighbors. Extend the hand of hope, not the boot of oppression, and instead lift up your neighbors with offerings of help, instead of shoving them down with the boot on the neck.
This is where the United States and Israel keep getting the long-term strategy wrong. Now, the US has asked that these Israeli-funded African mercenaries be granted IMMUNITY FROM WAR CRIMES! We will send US troops into harms way and ask that the other side be granted IMMUNITY?
Yet, we treat Bradley Manning, a US citizen convicted of no crimes, as if he were the greatest war criminal of all time.
Amazing hypocrisy. Breathtaking. So, the mask now falls at last. The United States, the UN security council, Israel, Britain and France, and NATO will all demonstrate an amazing use of force, claiming to be helping the rebels, when in fact they are really trying to crush the rebels, cutoff their arms supply, create a corridor that allows Israeli-funded mercenaries to resupply Gaddafi, and then grant IMMUNITY to those Israeli-funded mercenaries as they commit their war crimes. While the US looks on with its military obediently monitoring the situation.
Remember the “Oil for Food” Scandal?
The last time we used the US military in a no-fly zone and embargo to “cripple” a strong man was when the United Nations and NATO engaged in the now-scandolous Oil-for-Food Embargo. Remember? Where we starved the majority of the Iraqi population and helped Saddam get fat and happy?
Remember when Poppy Bush encouraged the heroes of Iraq to rise up and resist Saddam Hussein? They did so. And then the US stood down and allowed Saddam to crush those people.
Why? Perhaps because the United States needed those true patriots out of the way. The US knew it would one day eliminate Saddam and replace him with a more pliable puppet. But it needed the patriots of Iraq to be crushed first. For they would never be pliable puppets.
So too here in Libya, I think. The United States wants Gaddafi gone – eventually. To be replaced with a more pliable puppet. But the US doesn’t want the leaders and heroes of this uprising in Libya to be successful either. The US needs those intelligentsia of the nation, the politicians, military leaders, and true patriots of Libya to be crushed first.
And that is where the Israeli-funded African Mercenaries come into play. To crush those rebels. And then the US will provide diplomatic cover in the Security Council with its Veto and with this new immunity from war crimes resolution. Then, with the rebels sufficiently crushed, the US will be able to move in with its own pliable set of puppets, culled from the remainder of the Libyan populace that wasn’t stalwart or brave enough to rise up, but instead stood on the sidelines. From the ranks of them will bribes and blackmail and coercion by the US and NATO be drawn the future puppets of an oil-rich North African nation.
Keep your eyes on the ball. This is the game they are playing. Why else are the mainstream outlets (and many so-called “progressive” blogs) hiding this story? This is the game. Obama thinks he can fool the Western populations by using military force in the region under the guise of “averting a humanitarian disaster” but in reality, he is using that military force to quietly allow the suppression of the rebels. Israeli-funded African Mercenaries will do the killing and suppression. The US military will simply make sure that all arms to the rebels will be cut off. The US will suffocate and strangle the rebellion, while Israel finances and directs the murder of the rebellion. The US will claim it is really cutting off Gaddafi…
But that can’t be possible when the United States’ own “ally of allies”, Israel, is directly violating the arms embargo. When the military that is creating the embargo allows one side to violate the embargo, while the other side is not allowed to, then it is clear which side that military is on.
If the United States allows Israeli-funded African mercenaries to arm and supply and support Gaddafi, and simultaneously interdicts arms shipments to the Rebels, then the world will know, should know, must know that the US destroyed the Rebels. Not the other way around. This is the great game. To convince the sheeple of the West that black is white, day is night, and up is down, and wrong is right. Then, and only then, can true tyranny exist in the full light of day with the consent of the oppressed.
58 Comments
Thank you: I understand this perspective now.
Whether Israel is working *with* the US or against the US in Libya … IT SUCKS. Either way.
Really! You don’t say?
We are really screwed up. All this while Manning is being treated as a POW outside of a war zone and on US soil!
Did you know this?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/03/952165/-Anonymous-Will-Avenge-Manning
Obama pulls a Walker (a la Charlie Sheen).
Yeah, at first I was worried that we would see all kinds of political and military fallout, but the more I thought about it, the more I figured that Israel is not acting outside of US knowledge here. Then, I figured that the Administration might be on the red phone with Bibi saying, “You gotta be CRAZY bud! Stop it now!” And then, I found the UK Telegraph article, and it sort of all made sense.
We went to bat to provide cover for those mercenaries. Now, we will send in our boats and choppers and Marines to make sure the Rebels are sufficiently suffocated and gagged and isolated from outside aid. We may airlift civilians and bring some limited medical supplies…
But in the final analysis, we will do more strategic harm to the rebels than we will do good. Which is why, I think, they are so adamanst against us being there. They KNOW that we can’t be trusted.
Are you talking about Security Council Resolution 1970, passed last weekend, and reported in the Telegraph (it seems you are since the Telegraph article is dated Feb 27)?
If so, you (and the Telegraph) are in error. The resolution exempts nationals from non-signatory countries to the Rome Statute who are implementing the Resolution, not the mercenaries. The Telegraph misspoke. As did all the people who cited the article, and there were quite a few.
I really don’t know how Obama can pull this off, with the world now largely aware of this mercenary force. Mondoweiss has done a lot of coverage on this topic as well.
Israel really needs to listen to its moderate and left-leaning leaders again. This kind of brazen bully-thug approach to foreign policy is not going to secure Israel for the long term.
I think fear and paranoia are powerful forces, and I think that the foreign policy wonks in Israel (and America) have been overun with it. The neocon vision is to obliterate everyone who is not your ally, and then instill fear and terror in those left standing.
The obvious problem with that strategy, though, if you wargame it to its logical conclusion, is that you end up being you (US or Israel) against the WHOLE WORLD.
Then what? Start killing people? How many must die for the rest to be cowed? 1 million? 100 million? 1 billion? I think you find that after the first few hundred million, the rest of the region/world hits a tipping point. They decide – “we will die fighting back rather than watch you kill the next 200 million slowly through fear and terror.”
Which is what is exactly happening now in the Mideast and Africa. The tipping point. US, et al. hegemony in the region, with fear and terror and tyranny, has killed or wounded or decimated so many millions, obliterating economies, stifling freedoms, etc that the people have just collectively become FED UP. They are tipping the dynamic back.
Which is why the Neocon/Likud/Shas/Republican/Yisrael Beiteinu approach is so flawed. It assumes the worst of all “others” and then proceeds to dehumanize the “other” and then all but exterminates the other – be it political, economic, or military in nature.
But, I am preaching to the choir. Yihtzak Rabin held many of these same views that I espouse now. And he was assassinated by the far-right of his countrymen.
That doesn’t mean we should give up now though. Instead, we must keep that vision alive. PEACE THROUGH PERSISTENCE.
I hope you are correct in your interpretation. I don’t want to be correct. But I will reread it again and see where I, and the Telegraph, have gone wrong.
Regardless, the presence of the mercenaries being funded by our own ally is still reprehensible, and will be result in political blowback that defeats the entire concept of “strategic depth” or “political credibility.”
The US claims to want to help the people of Libya. Having Israeli-funded mercenaries simulataneously present to kill those people, while our military engages in an arms embargo of the rebels is an obvious hypocrisy.
“The resolution exempts nationals from non-signatory countries to the Rome Statute who are implementing the Resolution, not the mercenaries.”
I am thinking that when those mercenaries are nationals from the non-signatory countries, then that is one and the same thing, no?
The argument here is that NOBODY should be exempt from War Crimes tribunals. Nobody. If the mercenaries are coming from non-signatory countries, then they would be immune under this resolution, right? So, I am reading/interpreting it correctly. I think.
Again, a big point of my diary is to highlight the simultaneous hypocrisy of the US putting military assets in the Med to create an arms embargo (that will impact the rebels) while the US ally, Israel, is funding mercenaries in Libya to fight those rebels.
If we are going to get “involved” then we can’t be allowing that. Better we stay out of it, than to participate in the suppression of the rebels.
We should encourage a democracy to take root, and then treat it with respect. We will gain far greater “peace dividends” that way than to try and hijack the rebellion, eliminate it, and then replace Gaddafi with a new puppet. We will be hated for generations if we help destroy the rebels. Just saying…
“5. Yet, the Israeli government has authorized the Israeli company, Global CST, to finance and arm and supply Gaddafi with 50,000 African Mercenaries (from Uganda, Chad and other nations)! ”
This really requires a citation.
No, you’re not correct. Only foreign nationals carrying out the orders arising from the resolution itself are beyond the jurisdiction of the court if their country is not a party, unless their country waives, and those countries are supposed to prosecute domestically anyway. All the people within the scope of the investigation are within the jurisdiction of the court regardless of nationality.
Below is the ICC referral passage, the part you are worried about is paragraph 6. The referral is very clear. It instructs all parties to the resolution (members of the UN) to participate in carrying out the resolution, including the steps necessary to bring those being remanded to justice before the ICC. In order to do so, it has to make provisions for some of those states who are parties to the resolution who are not party to the Rome Statute, so it says they are not bound by the jurisdiction of the court in their participation unless their governments release them to the court, and it says that the states not party don’t pick up the tab for the court, the States Parties to the Rome Statute do.
All that is necessary to get a unanimous vote, instead of a lot of abstentions, which they wanted to have to show that the Security Council was speaking with one voice. It’s very significant that the three permanent members who are not party to the Rome Statute voted for the referral (Russia, U.S., and China), which has never happened before.
I didn’t think a state could immunize anyone against prosecution for the commission of war crimes. Wouldn’t that make those issuing the immunity complicit and accomplices in the commission of whatever crimes ensue as a result of the special status?
I don’t think Greg Solis would agree with the US on this.
I asked on Edward’s blog, or tried to, if we sure this is true. I haven’t dropped it into blogs since I’m unsure. The Mondoweiss stories don’t go much further for me, as they are in Arabic and another language (sorry to have forgotten).
I even googled the story this morning, and only got these:
http://gazasolidarity.blogspot.com/2011/03/israeli-company-recruiting-mercenaries.html
http://northerntruthseeker.blogspot.com/2011/03/israel-is-providing-mercenaries-for.html
Well, there are more now, but all link to the Ma’an News site.
If it’s so, we need to know, as does the world; if it’s weird propaganda, we need to know also.
I looked all over Al Jazeera English for it this morning; didn’t see it.
http://sentvolks.blogspot.com/2011/03/israeli-arms-distribution-company-cst.html
YEs, thank you both for finding that. I had a citation up, and I suppose I just made the mistake of not linking it to my final point. Rush to publish and all that. Thank you Mattcarmody for providing one (of many out there).
Here’s another one, for what is it worth:
http://www.presstv.com/detail/167814.html
Which I found was linked to by a few others as well. I think this is a legit story. Of course, if its not, then we certainly should know that too. But it makes sense that it would be. I cetainly don’t agree with Israeli foreign policy all the time (sometimes I do), but I know that hard-liners in the govt, with Avigdor Lieberman as the Foreign Minister, have a modus operandi of “do unto others before they do unto you” and that they seek “strategic depth” by creating layers of “fronts” that will forestall any immediate action on the homeland. Its a flawed logic, but its one they have publicly espoused in other formats. So, creating a forward projection of power through client states… hey – that’s what the United States does anyway! So, is it surprising Israel would too? Not really.
But in this case, it is not good. And it undermines a much bigger and better argument NOT to support Gaddafi. And it causes Israel and the US to both concede whatever shred of the moral high ground either nation can yet cling to (many would argue both nations threw away that position long ago…).
The resolution immunizes no one.
Excellent analysis, ondelette.
Whether or not this story can be proven soon, it does lead one to ask a number of questions about the mercenaries:
1. Does Gadhafi use middle men to bring in mercenaries?
2. Has he done this in the past, and is he using such companies now?
3. What are the firms used by him, if it is the case that he has employed them?
4. Stolen or forged passports have been confiscated from captured or intercepted mercenaries. How were these acquired? Are they being listed somewhere?
5. How are the mercenaries from Chad or other Saharan border countries getting in?
6. Where are their points of departure?
7. Whose aircraft are being used?
8. Where are the aircraft landing in Libya or adjacent to Libya?
9. Is Gadhafi using private contractors from any Western nations or Israel to shore up his regime?
It has been observed that the story of the Israeli mercenaries, approved by the Israeli government originated in the Hebrew Israeli press. Press TV’s allegation of “50,000 mercenaries” seems to be their embellishment on the original sources.
Tuaregs ‘join Gaddafi’s mercenaries’:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12647115
And with all the supposed financial blocks imposed on Libya and Gaddafi, where is the money coming from?
This is the million dollar question. I thought the West would isolate Gaddafi by freezing his accounts. That is the only way to defeat him. Dry up his money.
My concern with the “economic sanctions” against Gaddafi is whether his personal bank account and national sovereign funds are so intertwined that nobody can make heads or tails of them. ARe we freezing national assets? Is Gaddafi able to use those assets no matter what we do? Those are part of the problem with this.
As long as he can pay for foreign mercenaries, foreign weapons, and can continue to bomb his people from the sky, then any US arms embargo will only strangle the rebels. Not Gaddafi.
And because Libya is such an oil rich nation on the Mediterranean, with functioning refining capacity, I can fully see why the Western forces and Israel and their joint allies might actually rather prefer to prop up the devil they know (Gaddafi) than to risk dealing with the unknown. Although, at this point, I have no reason to believe that Radicalists of any religion are orchestrating this revolution. It is an upswelling of intelligentsia, former diplomats, military defectors, and everyday workers. This is about as pure and unfiltered as it gets.
And that is why I think the US is trying to quietly help it die. Because we allowed the same kind of thing to happen under Poppy Bush in Iraq. Why? Because the US wanted to keep a pliable puppet in place over all that oil.
A free and democratic people may not make terms for the oil reserves that BP or Shell or Total or Exxon Mobil may like. They may nationalize the oilfields. (Oh the horrors!).
So, the US wants to be in the drivers’ seat from the word “go” and if that means allowing a popular resistance to be crushed via dark ops and clandestine backstabbing, then they will.
American history attests to the validity of this tactic. Whether it is Israel, Italy, or Saudi Arabia that is paying for these mercenaries is a secondary concern.
The primary concern is that A US ALLY is helping keep Gaddafi propped up. Would it matter if I changed the headline to “ITalian-funded Mercenaries”?
No.
In fact, we could have easily seen, or will yet see, Xe get involved. AMerican-funded Mercernaries. Heaven knows we’ve already seen plenty of that in other regions. Why not here? I’m sure we could have had the US been anticipating this revolution.
Instead, the US is mired in Afghanistan and Iraq and Yemen and the Persian Gulf, and now Libya is aflames, a place where they least expected it, and the supply of oil is threatened. Not that the free and democratic people of Libya would disrupt it. They would not. They would merely profit from it.
And ask Nigeria how that flow of oil has worked for them. Shell runs that nation. Not the Nigerian people. And THAT is why Western-backed Mercenaries will be allowed in to crush the rebels. So that Western Oil Majors will be able to run this oil under Libya. NOT the free peoples of Libya.
THAT is why they will crush this rebellion with the Kabuki theater that is now unfolding.
Okay, then thank you for the analysis. But it doesn’t change the basic premise of the entire argument, which is that Mercenaries provide by American allies will continue to assist the regime while we prevent the rebels from arming themselves.
I still have some issues with the mechanisms of how this resolution will work.
Feel free to respond if I am reading this wrong, but essentially it still requires that the other states enforce this resolution against the non-party states who can claim the offending actors. And that is like asking Switzerland to prosecute Cheney or Bush. It aint gonna happen. And its like expecting the US, which maintains jurisdiction over Bush and Cheney, to abide by this as well. Which also ain’t gonna happen.
So, maybe this resolution is not any worse than the status quo, but I don’t see how it is any better in actual application. Or do you disagree?
Thanks!
HEre is another report:
http://www.eurasiareview.com/world-news/middle-east/israel-company-recruiting-gadhafi-mercenaries-report-03032011/
Quoted from Maan:
“Citing Egyptian sources, the Hebrew-language news site Inyan Merkazi said the company was run by retired Israeli army commanders.
“Company representatives recently flew to Chad to discuss the matter with a high-ranking Libyan intelligence officer Abduallah Sanusi, the report said. During the meeting, Sanusi agreed to pay the company to recruit up to 50,000 mercenaries from African countries, according to the news site.”
I don’t think PressTV created the 50,000 number for embellishment. It appears that Inyan Merkazi already had that number, based on how Maan is using syntax and pronouns.
Here is the Al Jazeera Article:
http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/C36A7C61-8874-4D82-9CC2-4886B4E58739.htm
(I think. I can’t read it myself, so I am trusting someone else who read the Arabic).
OK
Okay, Mondoweiss did a great job translating the Hebrew from Maan:
http://mondoweiss.net/2011/03/report-israel-company-recruiting-gadhafi-mercenaries.html#more-37685
Here’s a few quotes that Mondoweiss provides from the original news source (in case your link is slow, as mine has been):
“The article states that in the past, the company was under investigation for illegal sales to another African country, but this time, according to Egyptian sources, the company received explicit approval when the company’s CEO whose name was specifically mentioned in the document (there’s no link to that document within the body of the article) had met with the head of Aman (Hebrew acronym for Intelligence Directorate) Aviv Kokhavi and later with the Minister of Defense Barak and PM Netanyahu. That CEO, the article explains, had received the approval of the aforementioned officials to go ahead and recruit mercenaries as Israel fears the establishment of a Muslim Caliphate in Qaddafi’s place. It adds that the Libyan ruler seeks to establish an army of 50,000 mercenaries who will arrive from different areas in order to break apart the anti-government rebellion.”
“It is further reported that representatives of the Israeli company that deals in arms sales and serves as a broker for fighters had met with Libya’s intelligence chief, Abdallah Sannusi. The meeting took place in Chad, another African state. The final details of the deal were agreed upon in that meeting. Chad, Libya’s and Sudan’s neighbor to the south has had intimate relations with Israel for several decades now.”
“It should be noted that mercenaries who had already arrived in Tripoli, left from Chad and that is a provable fact. According to publications in the west, Qaddafi pays the company that deals in recruiting mercenaries 2,000 USD per day, per fighter. From that, the mercenaries personally receive about $100 per day. This is a brokerage deal to the tune of billions of dollars. The money is paid to the African supervisors who bring their gangs and rake in a fortune. The large amounts include weapons and ammunition that mercenaries use, and compensation for the mercenaries’ families in the event that fighters are killed, injured, or fall in captivity.”
**Thanks again to EdwardTeller and Mondoweiss for scooping this story
I would not normally have thought up this kind of thing, but based on how the US handled Iraq from 1979 to present, and how the OBama administration has been as deceptive as the previous ones, and the understanding that a free people of Libya will be able to control their destiny, and their own oil, in light of the Wikileaks revelations about how Shell Oil runs Nigeria, and I think it all fits together. The Oil Majors don’t want a Nationalized Oil program in Libya. Not that the rebels have asked for it. But they might. And that is a risk not to be taken, it seems.
Another way to look at it is this: If the rebels hold the Mediterranean seaports, then why is there a need for an embargo by sea? Why not a no-fly zone instead? Why an arms embargo? Who will suffer from that? Oil-for-food taught us how Embargos work against Strongmen. They don’t.
So, none of the actions so far of NATO or the UN or the statements of the US seem to fit with the reality of HELPING the rebels. And then this story breaks, and it all makes sense. Deniability. But the ultimate goal is to cleanse the nation of its rebels. Then, the West will take out Gaddafi when it suits THEM. On THEIR terms. Not the terms of the people of Libya.
FWIW, I sent on this info to Juan Cole and DemocracyNow; Juan is at JRICole at gmail.com(and gmail apparently has issues) and it was a story idea for DemocracyNow who have people on staff-including the Senior producer- who can read arabic.
Oh, and I’m still bothered that AJE hasn’t responded to my query of why they aren’t on this story as Edward indicated that AJA was reporting it.
Well, Al Jazeera is on this story – I think – it is the Arabic link I showed, which is here again:
http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/C36A7C61-8874-4D82-9CC2-4886B4E58739.htm
Is that what you were referring to?
Thanks for the send! I would love to hear Amy Goodman get on top of this. DemocracyNow is a program I have donated quite a bit to, and I live by it during my commute to/from wherever. I have a lot of them podcasted too. Amy Goodman and DemocracyNow are hands down, the BEST reporting right now, or ever, in the world. Thanks!
I was just thinking – if bloggers like us make this story a big deal, and we draw attention to it, and it results in policy initiative being ditched, or a change of strategy by those who thought they could dupe us, then I would be the first to be happy to say that our predictions did not come to pass. Which is what I hope for.
But I think some of this has already transpired. The mercenaries are already probably moving in. What is possible is that some Western nations may try to separate from the policy of hurting the rebels. My hope is that the revolution has progressed to a point where any attempt to shut it down will be seen as the naked aggression it is.
My hope is that the rebels will prevail, and that only direct intervention by a superpower could stop them. Lets hope.
OR here is another reason the West wants to privately help Gaddafi stay in power, while publicly pretending to want him toppled:
“Are the Arab uprisings running out of steam?” by Frank Gardner
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12654331
“Brendan Simms, a professor of international relations history at Cambridge University, was quoted on Friday by Reuters as saying that “Libya is where the fire of revolution from Tunisia and Egypt could go out. The stakes are very high.”
…………………
So, will that be the spin? As a way to stifle dissent and slow down the revolutionary fervor sweeping North Africa and the Middle East? By making the Libyan people pay in blood for it? And the spin has already begun — “see how Gaddafi didn’t topple overnight? See? That means the spirit of revolution has fizzled! Yippee!!” (as would state the random neocon/neoliberal war profiteer).
I say RUBBISH. I call bullshit on that claim. The fervor of each nation’s people will be what it will be. What happens in Libya will not impact Bahrain, Saudi, or Yemen. It will not stifle Wisconsinites. It will not deter those who are holding resolute to see Bradley Manning treated humanely. No, the fact that Gaddafi has dug his heels in only proves that the people of Libya were right to try and oust him.
The question now is whether the Western powers will allow them that right, or will the West step in, covertly, to shut down the people of Libya? But the “steam” as Mr. Gardner would claim, is NOT running out.
I am reminded of a famous American, John Paul Jones…
“I have not yet begun to fight…”
Yes, I disagree. The resolution doesn’t do that. It just makes it possible for non-parties to the Rome Statute to participate in the resolution by acknowledging their objections to the Rome Statute.
I thought the mercenaries had come into Libya on trucks, but there has been so much conflicting information, I may have it wrong.
The questions are good ones, and need answers. But the next bridge to approval by Bibi and Barak is a huge one, IMO. I think we need to hear what/who the original ‘Egyptian sources’ are. We all know that disinformation can be used by anyone with an agenda.
I hate that my initial reaction was to believe it; then I thought about how all the sites covering it linked to the original piece and video (which has no independent confirmation as to origin.)
By the way, the Brits are now rallying ‘advisors’ (remind you of Viet Nam?) to go in-country to help the rebels. Hmmm. We know from decades of history that there is, and will be more, deceit afoot; but sussing out whose lies have what agendas isn’t always easy, IMO.
NO. I’m referencing the complete ignoring of this story by http://english.aljazeera.net/
AJE has a reporter saying that the ‘revolution is running out of steam’; in the meantime, then U.N is willing to appoint a different Ambassador because it ‘is every nations right’ to appoint who they want.
SOMEBODY has to come out and say that Gaddafi is no longer considered the head of the Libyan state.
You are right. Which is why I am suspicious of the “overtures” made so far. Are they serious? Is the West serious about seeing Gaddafi toppled? Or is this all just bluster and bother and hot air? I don’t think time is on the side of the rebels. They cannot hold out for long against unbridled air assaults.
And I’m more of a paranoic, seeing the Brits and U.S. asking AJE and others NOT to publish this. And still wondering about “Informed Comment” and DemocracyNow.
But the rational wouldn’t be about the effect on the Middle East because AJA has already ‘printed’ it.
So it has to be about something else and it wouldn’t surprise me that this:
https://www.stratfor.com/campaign/dispatch-complexity-persian-gulf-unrest?utm_source=JMF&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=WIPAJMF110303160409&utm_content=Freelist
has a lot to do with it.
This story about the Israeli company IS truly horrific and the Israeli fear of an Islamist Caliphate if Libya falls is so much bullshit that all the bovines in the world couldn’t match the output.
IT’S ALL ABOUT THE MONEY.
“…he(Obama) didn’t want ‘a situation in which defenseless civilians were finding themselves trapped and in great danger,’ or ‘a stalemate that over time could be bloody.’”
Um, forgive me, I’m fairly new at this, but WLCentral.org is reporting that the US/NATO allies are already supporting the “rebels” side of this conflict (without acknowledgement:)
“10:00 PM The Pakistan Observer reports that French, British and US special forces have entered Libya, to train and assist rebel groups to overthrow Gaddafi. The article also outlines how naval vessels from India are underway for deployment in defense of the Libyan uprising. The vessels will presumably join the USS Enterprise, which is also on its way into the Mediterranean via the Suez canal…According to an exclusive report confirmed by a Libyan diplomat in the region “the three Western states have landed their “special forces troops in Cyrinacia and are now setting up their bases and training centres” to reinforce the rebel forces who are resisting pro-Qaddafi forces in several adjoining areas. A Libyan official who requested not to be identified said that the U.S. and British military gurus were sent on February 23 and 24 night through American and French warships and small naval boats off Libyan ports of Benghazi and Tobruk.” (http://wlcentral.org/node/1312 – TUESDAY, March 1 entry)
Clinton has been saying that a “civil war” could erupt. Is this what she meant? NATO makes one happen by funding/orchestrating both sides in the fight, amplifying the conflict, forcing NATO to, “as a last resort, intervene militarily to stop the civil war killings in Libya;” and whence “save the day,” having the Libyians “owe” NATO a great indebtedness for “saving” their country, say with military bases and privatized oil contracts?
Is there not an international statute that says this is categorically illegal and criminally prosecutable?
Excellent observation. This is exactly what happened in Iraq. We provided weapons, training, money, and support to Saddam Hussein for over a decade. Then, we sent in our troops for a limited time. Then, we encouraged the rebels to rise up. Then, we backed down once they did, and watched them get slaughtered. Then, we imposed a no-fly zone over the nation (after the rebels were slaughtered). Then, we engaged in an embargo on the nation. Then, we put a lot more ground troops in Kuwait and marched in and have yet to leave.
And some would argue that we’ve incited the civil unrest there between factions.
The Raymond Davis story in Pakistan has revealed that Davis might have been coordinating with Taliban to create terror pretexts as well. Which is why the ISI may have shut him down. The “line” he crossed may have been that they discovered that the USA was instigating the very terror attacks it was needing to justify its “war on terror.”
So, yes, this should be very illegal. But I think its been happening for a very long time. And its no surprise to me that it may yet be happening in Libya.
At the end of the day, the United States and NATO wants to make sure Libya is firmly in the control of the Oil Majors. Shell gets to have Nigeria. So maybe BP can have Libya this time. Or perhaps Total and BP will do a Joint-Venture and split the running of the nation up 50/50. Maybe Exxon Mobil will get in on the action.
Ultimately, NATO is all about projecting the forward power of the Hydro-carbon industry, and about the subjugation of peoples and nations to accomodate that industry. Economic Fascism to the nth degree.
I thought I had remembered Obama saying the US had frozen Libya’s assets. Here’s the Executive Order, dated Feb. 25, 2011. The list of primaries is at the bottom, called ‘Annex’:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/25/executive-order-libya
If there are loopholes, you might find them, but on the face of it, maybe they mean business. Though what happens to the funds eventually? Who decides?
Another sad outcome of this story is the fact that one of our allies, Israel, appears to be using African mercenaries to add fuel to the fire.
Now, as I’ve said – it could be Italy or France doing the supplying and I’d still be just as outraged.
But here’s another angle I’ve not seen discussed here yet:
Africa as a continent has been savaged and abused and raped and pillaged since the European Man of modern day decided to traverse its depths. And since then, its people have been engaged in bloody genocidal conflicts. Whether it be for the oil, the diamonds, the copper mines, or trade routes, the African people have been the PAWNS of the Western powers.
When I hear/read stories about the use of African mercenaries being hired by outside powers to fight one another, to continue the subjugation of their own continent for the sake of stirred up tribal rivalries, it makes my heart bleed.
It is the classic “divide and conquer” strategy.
Here’s an excerpt from a Queensryche song that sums it up:
“Black man, trapped again, holds his chains in his hand. Brother killing brother for the profit of another. Game Point – Nobody Wins.”
That excerpt from the song was about the way drug lords use the African American community to slay one another for their masters profit. Well, the Western powers are no better. We have encouraged the tribal rivalries of every single element of African society. Why have the African people allowed the West to do this? Why do they prefer to slaughter their own cousins with American-made guns or be paid by Israeli ex-Generals for that? Why? To be further subjugated by the West? So that nations like Nigeria can be run by Shell Oil?
Africa needs to find true leaders who can reach across tribal divisions and unite their people, cousins all, to reject Western imperialism and Western tyranny. I say that as a Westerner who is sick of watching the society my forefathers and foremothers built being a bastion of darkness and evil in this world. Sick.
A hearty ‘amen’ to that, marsdragon.
I know we froze assets, but I was listening to NPR the other morning and some of the comments on there (I don’t remember names, sorry) were that it might not work as well as we hope. The reason is that Gaddafi has so intermingled the national assets with his own that we may be freezing personal bank accounts, but in reality, as long as he has troops on the ground and can create “facts on the ground” then he has access to cash. Oil revenues, for instance. Commerce is still ongoing. So, he collects the money. I suppose there is no way to truly “Freeze” his accounts and all access to cash when he is Libya and has been for 40 years. Basically, what I guess I’m saying, is that as long as he can seize it by force, it will be his to do with as he pleases. And that unfortunately leads to sanctions against the entire country – which will end up hurting the civilians we claim to want to protect.
So, I am not sure if that is what we call a loophole, or just a big fucking mess. But the reality is that we can’t do this the way we did Iraq. We can’t starve millions of innocents and cutoff the rebels in a vain attempt to starve Gaddafi.
I think the no-fly zone may the best way to stop him using his air power. And then we need to cutoff his ability to hire mercenaries. We need to make sure that none of our allies are supplying him. You or I may be unable to figure out the true truth about all this — but our intelligence agencies sure as he could and should. And our diplomacy needs to make sure this does not happen.
I know that Israel is worried about its security. But it has no reason to believe an Islamic Caliphate will arise in Libya. And even if one does – the mere existence of a Caliphate is not itself a good/bad thing. The NATURE of the Caliphate would matter. The Vatican is a Catholic state. Israel is a Jewish State. The mere presence of a Muslim state should not worry Israel. There is no reason to believe that the people of Libya will hunger or long for a radicalized state.
These nations probably look to Turkey and see a far more enviable model. Or pre-1980 Lebanon. Or even the potential for a post 2011 Egypt. I think that security for Israel can better accomplished by taking the MORAL HIGH GROUND. But unfortunately, the hard hard rightest right wing of politicians and religious radicals have overtaken the secular and religious seats of power in Israel right now, and they are bulldozing their way into pariah status. And many Jewish MKs have voiced their objection to this approach. And some have recently resigned stating those objections publicly. That they can no longer defend the actions of Lieberman, and can no longer function as ministers of state with such madness at the helm.
A free and secure and democratic Libya will be good for all of Europe, all of the Mediterranean region and for Africa and the Middle East. And so what if the people of Libya nationalize their oil reserves? They will still need to hire Western oil companies anyway. They will still sell their oil. They will still have to compete with OPEC, unless they join it.
And shouldn’t we be getting off oil anyway? What happened to our Green Initiatives? Libya should be as worried about diversifying into other sectors anyway.
And African leaders need to take steps to discourage the use/abuse of their young men as mercenaries who die for the sake of Western power fantasies…
Brother killing brother? Central Africans are treated like slaves by Arab North Africans. Or have you forgotten Sudan?
Well, it doesn’t change the fact that Shell Oil runs Nigeria.
It doesn’t change the fact that Diamond Mines and Copper Mines are at the root of the vicious warfare in East Congo.
It doesn’t change the fact that Mercenaries from Central Africa are willing to die for an Arab North African Gaddafi.
Yes, it is brother killing brother. Remember Rwanda? Maybe cousing killing cousin is a more appropriate term. But I was quoting a song, so I didn’t have the luxury of changing the words.
I think the song’s terminology stems from the common slang term that African American males have for one another, in that they tend to think of each other as “brothers.” Which is a noble term to use for each other, as it implies and imparts a sense of brotherhood.
Hope that explains my position. I didn’t really expect anyone to disagree with the perspective I was sharing. I have not forgotten Sudan. I was remembering Rwanda. And I won’t insult anyone by asking if they had forgotten it. Thanks again for your contributions to the post!
AT the end of the day, Libya is in Africa, and I think there should be no warfare between Black AFricans and Arab Africans.
They should be brothers. Period.
Ethiopia has been at war with Somalia and Eritrea as well. All Black Africans.
And then the oppression in Zimbabwe is terrible.
I never intended to vilify Arab Africans and lionize Black Africans, or vice versa. My point was more the universal brotherhood/sisterhood of humanity. And about finding common solutions to achieve a better world in lieu of using divisions such as Arab/Black which ultimately benefits Western imperialists.
Speaking of Sudan – a large part of the problem with the ongoing violence there had as much to do with foreign power meddling with and instigating those divisions. I know that China had about 4000 troops there, to project its power, and the Gulf States were sending resources and troops there to continue the civil war. And whoever else we do or don’t know about that was instigating and prolonging the divisions between North and South, Arab and Black.
What is funny is that this was not always the case in Sudan. Islam united much of North AFrica, Arab and Black, to varying degrees hundreds of years ago. Now, the same religion is a source of division there. I think the culprit is not a religious one, but one of outside nations or power groups that have little regard for the local people. And that is my point. The people of Africa should resist being used as Pawns for the sake of outside powers. Reclaim their destiny and take their future into their own hands. As the Libyan Rebels have begun to do with their fight against Gaddafi.
Peace to all.
“It just makes it possible for non-parties to the Rome Statute to participate in the resolution by acknowledging their objections to the Rome Statute.”
A non-party to the Rome Statute can object to the Rome Statute now? Well, I suppose that’s great. A country that doesn’t want to be subject to the ICC can now at least object to the statute. Okay. Doesn’t sound like it makes it any easier to enforce the statute against non-parties. Just makes it easier for non-parties to object to it.
Regardless, war criminals such as Bush and Cheney still go unpunished by the Obama Administration, while he continues to roast Afghan children with hellfire missiles. And Geneva’s hands are tied in prosecuting or apprehending Bush or Cheney. So, this resolution doesn’t change that. Because if it did, I’d like to hear/see it happen ASAP.
Yesterday on NPR, I was listening to the BBC correspondent in Tripoli talking to a rebel in Zawiyah. He was describing how the mercenary sniper had shot their high command – their strategist and tactician military defector. He described having 10 days of food/medical supplies. They were surrounded on 3 sides. They had killed 20 Gaddafi mercenaries. But they had lost many as well. They were relying on sheer wits. The rebel said they were not sure if they could withstand any more air strikes.
The correspondent asked him why he thought he and his rebel allies could hold out against such odds.
The answer? “We are all prepared to die. We are Libyans. This is our home. We fight for freedom and honor. These enemies. They are paid to fight. They are not Libyan. They are here for money. They will retreat before dying to the last man.”
And today? Good news. They have repulsed the mercenaries from Zawiyah.
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=210906
Good on them. This is what Freedom is. The willingness to die for it. And sometimes, those who fight for it don’t die. They win.
Mars, this might be the answer to why there isn’t any press coverage,even by AJE: “Ma’an, the Palestinian Al Jazeera”. Not part of the PA which is the only org the west recognizes.
In the meantime, this may explain the U.S. stance:
U.S. Wavers on ‘Regime Change’
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703580004576180522653787198.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories
And our drug supplier and arms manufacturer subsidizer Saudi Aravia has outlawed any protests/demonstrations and NOTHING
Mars, this might be the answer to why there isn’t any press coverage,even by AJE: “Ma’an, the Palestinian Al Jazeera”. Not part of the PA which is the only org the west recognizes.
In the meantime, this may explain the U.S. stance:
U.S. Wavers on ‘Regime Change’
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703580004576180522653787198.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories
And our drug supplier and arms manufacturer subsidizer Saudi Arabia has outlawed any protests/demonstrations and NOTHING is being said about that:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/03/201135143046557642.html
“State television on Saturday quoted the interior ministry as saying that security forces would use all measures to prevent any attempt to disrupt public order.”
So much for condemning force by authorities over protests.
And it also turns out the U.S. has bases in or around ALL the countries in the Persian/Arabian Gulf.
What is interesting is that the Roman Empire stood strong as long as it kept its power over the Mediterranean as a whole. It was the “lake of Rome.” Now, it seems that the North African crises are threatening to upend a European/Western dominance of that same body of water and the region. The Strait of Gibraltor is a critical passageway, and if Morocco were likely to fall, there would be tremendous push by the West to avert that. Same for Algeria. I think you are right with your comments linking to the WSJ article. The Obama administration has become somewhat captive to its allies in the region. The problem is what the WSJ identifies – the risk that reforms come too slow, too little, and the US is seen as having been on the wrong side of history, having supported tyrannies that don’t change.
Like in 1848, these string of revolutions may not yield te fuly expected results. But then we had WWI and WWII. And now we have modern Germany, an examplar of nations. Time will turn against the forces of darkness. The question is not IF the forces of tyranny will fall. It is a matter of how many innocents must die along the way. And how hard the wicked want to fall. History is unkind to the wicked.
Hubris cometh before the fall…
“and the US is seen as having been on the wrong side of history, having supported tyrannies that don’t change.”; already there in the arab world.
I really wonder why it doesn’t occur to those who proclaim their ‘exceptionalism’ (“chosen people”, “only true word of god”, “manifest destiny”, etc. ) that by setting themselves apart from the rest of homo sapiens, they set themselves up for antagonism. Truly hubris.
I had someone who reads Arabic look at the AJA story for me. The article claims that former Israeli defense minister Shlomo Ben Ami and the Israeli ambassador to Paris met with the head of the Libyan secret police in Chad. (I think this may be the same person referred to in the Mondoweiss translation as the intelligence chief). A couple of caveats: I’ve found that stories on AJA are more thinly sourced than on AJE. My guess is we won’t see it in English until they have more confirmation. Secondly, Gaddafi has had decades to funnel money & forge connections with sub-Saharan African counties. He played a leading role in the formation of the African Union. He provided military training to Charles Taylor(Liberia),Foday Sankoh(Sierra Leone) & Tuareg rebels from Mali among others, see these links:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/02/24/134030000/gadhafis-mercenaries-may-be-remnants-of-his-pan-arabic-army
http://palestinechronicle.com/view_article_details.php?id=16691
So my question is, why would he need an Israeli company to supply African mercenaries for him? He knows all the bad actors on the continent, heck, he trained most of them.
He’s already paying Mali Tuareg’s to come into Libya and fight for him. Why he would need the Israeli company -I surmise- is twofold: to hide the action and gain sufficient numbers because his own army he hasn’t equipped or trained well because of his fear of them staging a coup.
This is quite a thread.
Thank you to all for the content.
I look forward to Juan Cole and DemNow following up.
Thanks marsdragon.