TODAY IN HISTORY 19TH MARCH, 2011: NATO ATTACKS LIBYA

By | March 19, 2012 at 1:34 am | No comments | Africa, International Solidarity, Libya, News, OUR CAMPAIGNS, Situational Awareness, The Pan-Africanist Imperatives

TODAY IN HISTORY 19TH MARCH, 2011: NATO ATTACKS LIBYA

By Pan-Africanist International
On 19 March, military operations began, with US and British forces firing over 110 Tomahawk cruise missiles,[21] the French Air Force and British Royal Air Force[22] undertaking sorties across Libya and a naval blockade by the Royal Navy.[23] Air strikes against Libyan Army tanks and vehicles by French jets were since confirmed.[24][25] The official names for the interventions by the coalition members are Opération Harmattan by France; Operation Ellamy by the United Kingdom; Operation Mobile for the Canadian participation and Operation Odyssey Dawn for the United States.[26] See: 2011 military intervention in Libya, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GIF - 69.3 kb
Soliman Bouchuiguir, former president of the Libyan League for Human Rights with symbiotic ties to the National Transitional Council, generated the pack of lies that justified NATO’s war allegedly to protect the Libyan population. He is currently the new Libyan ambassador to Switzerland.
This multi-state military intervention in Libya was ostensibly meant to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which was taken in response to claims by Soliman Bouchuiguir, a shadowy human rights figure whose baseless allegations against Gaddafi were endorsed by the UN system and its affiliated human rights agencies without the slightest verification. Each one in his own way, Nazemroaya and Teil shed light on a failed system of international law and justice, which has made itself complicit in NATO’s war crimes in Libya. Voltaire Network | 17 October 2011. See: Documentary by Julien Teil: “Humanitarian War in Libya : There is no evidence !” Lybia: Human rights impostors used to spawn NATO’s fraudulent war by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya.
“I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”
    • - Gen. Wesley Clark. Retired 4-star US Army general. Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the Kosovo War. [See: Gen. Wesley Clark Weighs Presidential Bid: "I Think About It Everyday" http://bit.ly/xKO56Y @democracynow.]
According to former US General Wesley Clarke, in an interview held on March 02, 2007 the war had been planned a long time ahead.

AMY GOODMAN: Now, let’s talk about Iran. You have a whole website devoted to stopping war.

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Www.stopiranwar.com.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you see a replay in what happened in the lead-up to the war with Iraq — the allegations of the weapons of mass destruction, the media leaping onto the bandwagon?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: Well, in a way. But, you know, history doesn’t repeat itself exactly twice. What I did warn about when I testified in front of Congress in 2002, I said if you want to worry about a state, it shouldn’t be Iraq, it should be Iran. But this government, our administration, wanted to worry about Iraq, not Iran.

I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.” This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, “We’re going to war with Iraq? Why?” He said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I guess they don’t know what else to do.” So I said, “Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?” He said, “No, no.” He says, “There’s nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq.” He said, “I guess it’s like we don’t know what to do about terrorists, but we’ve got a good military and we can take down governments.” And he said, “I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail.”

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” — meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office — “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

AMY GOODMAN: I’m sorry. What did you say his name was?

GEN. WESLEY CLARK: I’m not going to give you his name.

Further hints of advance planning were also provided by US Congressman, Dennis Kutchnik:
WATCH VIDEO http://www.democracynow.org/2007/3/2/gen_wesley_clark_weighs_presidential_bid
US Congressman, Rep. Dennis J Kucinich writes in November 2010 War Games: “Southern Mistral” Air Attack against Dictatorship in a Fictitious Country called “Southland”
On November 2, 2010 France and Great Britain signed a mutual defence treaty, which included joint participation in “Southern Mistral” (www.southern-mistral.cdaoa.fr), a series of war games outlined in the bilateral agreement. Southern Mistral involved a long-range conventional air attack, called Southern Storm, against a dictatorship in a fictitious southern country called Southland. The joint military air strike was authorised by a pretend United Nations Security Council Resolution. The “Composite Air Operations” were planned for the period of 21-25 March, 2011. On 20 March, 2011, the United States joined France and Great Britain in an air attack against Gaddafi’s Libya, pursuant to UN Security Council resolution 1973.
Have the scheduled war games simply been postponed, or are they actually under way after months of planning, under the name of Operation Odyssey Dawn? Were opposition forces in Libya informed by the US, the UK or France about the existence of Southern Mistral/Southern Storm, which may have encouraged them to violence leading to greater repression and a humanitarian crisis? In short was this war against Gaddafi’s Libya planned or a spontaneous response to the great suffering which Gaddafi was visiting upon his opposition?
Members of the United States Congress are wondering how much planning time it took for our own government, in concert with the UK and France, to line up 10 votes in the Security Council and gain the support of the Arab League and Nato, and then launch an attack on Libya without observing the constitutional requirement of congressional authorisation.
Libya was attacked, we have been told, because Gaddafi allegedly had killed 6,000 of his own people. But is this true? It should be remembered that in 2006, a full 18 years after the Lockerbie bombing, the US lifted sanctions against Libya, which was welcomed back into the international fold.
Now, as Gaddafi faces armed internal opposition backed by a UN Security Council resolution and faces powerful external opposition backed by the military of the US, the UK and France, he is told he must give up power. But to whom? What is the end game?
The US has been dancing around the regime change issue, (since that is not sanctioned by the UNSC Resolution) but as in most cases one has to watch where the bombs are falling to determine whether or not regime change is the policy.
The newest argument for regime change is that if he is not ousted Gaddafi can be expected to attempt Lockerbie-type retaliation against the west in response to the attacks seeking to oust him…
Wikileaks threw some light on the possible reasons for the policy of regime change:
Wikileaks: Al-Qadhafi perceives himself as “a superman of history” and is not able to admit fault or weakness. Cosmetic attempts at economic reform are acceptable and help advance al-Qadhafi’s goal of reingratiating Libya with the West, but the shared assessment of Ghanem and el-Meyet is that meaningful economic and political reform will not occur while al-Qadhafi is alive. – Reference id aka Wikileaks id #161860, Subject: National Oil Corporation Chairman Shukri Ghanem May Seek To Resign Soon, Origin: Embassy Tripoli (Libya) Cable timeSun, 13 Jul 2008 14:47 UTC,
[National Oil Corporation Chairman Shukri Ghanem May Seek To Resign Soon, Wikileaks, id #161860, 08TRIPOLI227, Sun, 13 Jul 2008 14:47 UTC, http://wikileaks.org/cable/2008/07/08TRIPOLI565.html]
“According to geological estimates, the subsurface running from Darfur in what was southern Sudan through Chad into Cameroon is one giagantic oil field in extent perhaps equivalent to a new Saudi Arabia. Controlling southern Sudan as well as Chad and Cameroon is vital to the Pentagon strategy of “strategic denial” to China of their future oil flows. So long as a stable and robust Ghaddafi regime remained in power in Tripoli that control remained a major problem. The simultaneous splitting off of the Republic of South Sudan from Khartoum and the toppling of Ghaddafi in favor of weak rebel bands beholden to Pentagon support was for the Pentagon Full Spectrum Dominance of strategic priority.” [F. William Engdahl, NATO's War on Libya is Directed against China: AFRICOM and the Threat to China's National Energy Security, Global Research, September 25, 2011]
Total Victory In Libya, “The Jewel In The Crown” Is Libyan Oil
The US ambassador to Tripoli tells US companies: “oil is the jewel in the crown of Libyan natural resources”. Total victory promises 35% of Libyan oil concessions to the French oil company Total. Crossed Crocodiles writes: “The entire intervention against Libya was driven by potential profits. Pierre Lévy quotes a 2007 speech by Sarkozy:


“‘Europe is today the only force capable of carrying forward a project of civilization. … America and China have already begun the conquest of Africa. How long will Europe wait to build the Africa of tomorrow?
While Europe hesitates, others advance.”

Not wanting to be left behind, Dominique Strauss-Kahn around the same time expressed his desire for a Europe stretching “from the cold ice of the Arctic in the North to the hot sands of the Sahara in the South (. . .) and that Europe, I believe, if it continues to exist, will have reconstituted the Mediterranean as an internal sea, and will have reconquered the space that the Romans, or Napoleon more recently, attempted to consolidate.”

A Strong And Independent African Union Commission Can Make A Difference!
A “no-fly zone” was turned into a massive attack on Libyan citizens and infrastructure.  A successfully independent and secular state may have been reduced to the chaos of Somalia. That has not finished playing out, and will not for decades. Africans in Libya from other countries were and continue to be subjected to mayhem and murder. The US will probably get a large military base in Libya, where it used to have one before Gaddafi. It will then proceed with its plans to wage proxy war and cause chaos on the continent. Libya’s oil and water will go to serve western bankers.
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia – The African Union (AU) has lifted Libya’s suspension and allowed the National Transitional Council (NTC) to occupy the country’s seat at the continental body, following Thursday’s death of ousted leader Mouammar Kadhafi by NTC fighters. The Peace and Security Council (PSC), of which Libya is a member, lifted the suspension ‘under exceptional circumstances’ and ‘without prejudice’ to the relevant laws, which ban unconstitutional governments from occupying power. The PSC said the circumstances in Libya were exceptional and unique, with the departure of the long-serving leader Kadhafi.
“The PSC decided to authorize the current authorities in Libya to occupy the seat of Libya in the AU organs,” the PSC said in a statement late Thursday.
NTC fighters reportedly captured the former leader alive before killing him, during the battle for his hometown of Sirte.
Earlier, the AU had insisted that it would only lift the suspension of Libya after the NTC agreed to protect the interest of the migrant workers, mainly from the sub-Saharan Africa, who have been harassed, arrested and detained by the NTC fighters.
Special Comment: Gaddafi’s death: African Union lifts Libya’s suspension
Very strange news! It looks like the PSC was looking for the slightest opportunity to recognize the NTC ‘without prejudice’ to the relevant laws, which ban unconstitutional governments from occupying power. The fact that they would use the case of the treatment of the human rights African migrants as a precondition for the recognition ought not to be exclusive of mandated constitutive obligations of the PSC. It is not in the power of the PSC to overrule its own constitutive resolution.
Furthermore, there should be no reason to suppose that the kind of barbarism associated with the capture and extra-judicial execution should be allowed to invade and contaminate the African Union and throw the Rule of Law out of the door! Is the PSC saying that it is not right for any group of people, soldiers or civilians, to take up arms and stage a coup d’etat or a civil war, but if they manage to capture and execute the President, then it is right? Is that this precedence not more in favour of war and insecurity than what the AU Peace and Security Council ought to be seen to be promoting?
Would it not have been better to maintain the suspension until the NTC has successfully conducted the elections they themselves have been talking about in a few months? The claim that because the rebels of a country have been able to extra-judicially execute a head of state, they can now walk in and take their seat as a new government is an insult to the struggle for the rule of law, the respect for human rights and the Peace and Security of every African! One may find nothing wrong with the recognition itself because the AU has virtually done so, but the reason given by the PSC to circumvent their own terms of reference is mind boggling!
Once again, this is one of the important reasons why we of the Pan-Africanist International look favourably to the candidacy of South Africa’s Home Minster, Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma for the Chairperson of the African Union Commission. Hence OUR CAMPAIGNS 2012: » Towards… AN AU FREE FROM FOREIGN INTERFERENCE… Min. Dlamini-Zuma for the Chairperson of the African Union Commission! AU Summit, June 23-30, 2012 in Lilongwe, Malawi.

For Life, the Environment, and Social Justice!

Social Media Outreach
Pan-Africanist International – a grammar of Pan-Africanism and its manners of articulation.

E-mail: SocialMedia@panafricanistinternational.org
Website: http://www.panafricanistinternational.org/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/PanAfricanists
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pan-Africanist-International/
Googlegroup: http://groups.google.com/group/pan-africanist-briefs
Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/ThePanAfricanists

Print Friendly