Introduction:
The Libya are in the middle of a life or death civil war and Moammar Gadhafi is still in power and yet somehow the Libyan rebels have had enough time to establish a new Central Bank of Libya and form a new national oil company. Perhaps when this conflict is over those rebels can become time management consultants. They sure do get a lot done. What a skilled bunch of rebels – they can fight a war during the day and draw up a new central bank and a new national oil company at night without any outside help whatsoever.
The situation in Libya is grave. The imperialists are preparing to introduce ground troops to occupy Libya or partition the country, as the present level of intervention in the form of weapons, special forces, assassination squads and tactical leadership has proven insufficient.
Libyan Revelation
Since March 17, 2011, Libya has been subjected to the most brutal imperial air, sea and land assault in its modern history. Thousands of bombs and missiles, launched from American and European submarines, warships and fighter planes, are destroying Libyan military bases, airports, roads, ports, oil depots, artillery emplacements, tanks, armored carriers, planes and troop concentrations. Hundreds of civilians have been killed in this bombardment. Dozens of CIA and SAS special forces have been training, advising and mapping targets for the anti-Gaddafi forces. The US-NATO forces are effectively leading the civil war against the Gaddafi government.
According to news reports, despite this massive military support and the total control of Libya’s sky and coastline by the imperialists, the US-NATO backed rebel forces are retreating in many places. The reason for their retreat lies in the fact that they do not have popular support and are increasingly seen by the Libyan people as traitors to the nation, willing to sell out the sovereignty of the country to the imperialists. The imperialist propaganda that the Libyan people were waiting for deliverance from the Gaddafi regime and are desperate for US-NATO military intervention is being exposed daily. In many towns and villages, the people organized in militias have joined forces with the Libyan army to fight back and defeat the US-NATO backed rebels.
20 major and minor foreign military powers have intervened in this coalition headed by the US, attacking the sovereignty of Libya.
Imperialist intervention in Libya has heightened the national consciousness amongst the people, who are seeing the imperialists as their bitter enemies out to establish their own dictate through a puppet regime. Despite the defection of various officials of the Gaddafi regime to the imperialists, the masses of people are fighting to defend their freedom and sovereignty.
Despite the US government keeping a cloak of secrecy on its intelligence operations in Libya, facts have come to light that reveal the hand of the American intelligence agencies in directing the operations of the Libyan rebel forces. The key military leaders of the rebel forces are well known to the US government and are long standing CIA operatives. Khalifa Haftar was appointed chief rebel commander on March 17 on the eve of the beginning of US NATO bombing of Libya. The imperialist media made out that the rebel forces were indigenous forces whom they didn’t know much about. However a US think tank, Jamestown Foundation, exposed this lie on April 1 when it reported on Haftar’s background and record. This man was part of Gaddafi’s inner circle, caught by the Americans in Chad in 1988, turned over and taken to US, where in collaboration with the CIA, he set up the so called “Libyan National Army” in rural Virginia in the same year. Here the US trained anti government forces to topple the Gaddafi regime. Haftar was sent to Libya in March to lead the “rebel forces”. Earlier, in 1996, he is reported to have tried to organize a rebellion in Eastern Libya against the Gaddafi regime.
Geography of Libya
Official Name: Great Socialist People´s Libyan Arab Republic
Location: Libya consists mostly of huge areas of desert. Libya shares borders with Tunisia and Algeria in the west, and Egypt in the east, while the Sahara extends across the southern frontiers with Niger, Chad and the Sudan.
Capital: Tripoli
Area: The area of Libya, one of the largest countries in Africa, is 1,757,000 sq km (678,400 sq mi).
Language: Arabic is the official language, although Berber is sometimes spoken and English and Italian are used in trade .Arabic must be used for official purposes.
Religion: Islam is the state religion, and about 97 percent of all Libyans are Sunni Muslim. A small number are Roman Catholic.
Population: At the 1984 census, Libya had a population of 3,637,488. The 1997 estimated population was 5,484,202, giving the country an overall population density of 3 persons per sq km (8 per sq mi). The population, however, is unevenly distributed; more than two-thirds live in the more densely settled coastal areas. The indigenous population of Libya is mostly Berber and Arab in origin; about 17 percent of the population consists of foreign workers and their families. Some 86 percent of the people live in urban areas, although some Libyans still live in nomadic or semi nomadic groups.
Membership: Libya is a member of the UN, OAU, Arab League , OPEC, Union of the Arab Maghreb and Organization of the Islamic Conference
Background
Illegal bombing is planned to continue for another three months, having completed 6 months of non-stop bombing, with nothing achieved in Libya other than death and destruction.
NATO agreed on Wednesday to a three-month extension of its illegal bombing campaign in Libya. The agreement on the continuation of the military aggression against the sovereign North African country came at a meeting of ambassadors of the 28 NATO states in Brussel.
On Tuesday, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen already said during conference at UN headquarters in New York that the mandate, which is interpreted by the US-led NATO as an excuse to allow its terror bombing on Libya, will remain in place until revoked by the UN Security Council.
Rasmussen called the Western aggression on Libya which has killed thousands of Libyan civilians including three baby grandchildren of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi and destroyed much of the country’s civilian and public services infrastructure including a huge water supply and a television station “effective”.
NATO launched the illegal war with aerial bombardment, drone and missile strikes on Libya in mid-March, saying the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 gave them a mandate to bomb the country to demand demand a no-fly zone to “protect the Libyan civilians”.
Under this “protecting” guise, the U.S. military, NATO, and the United Nations took part in the bombing of Libya, claiming to support a so-called popular and spontaneous protest which for many obvious reasons has been a CIA operation from the beginning.
With NATO still carrying out daily bombing raids in a desparate attempt to kill the Libyan leader, reports of massacres and atrocities committed by the rebels who represent the so-called “new democratic Libya” continue to mount, many of them directed against the large numbers of sub-Saharan African migrant workers who have been killed, abused and detained solely on the basis of the color of their skin.
Meanwhile Muammar Qaddafi on Tuesday called on the Libyan people to be patient and have faith, saying: “What is happening now in Libya is a charade which can only take place because of the NATO air raids, which will not last forever. When they have left the traitors will be gone too.”
When France launched Operation Odyssey five months ago, which was immediately to be joined by Britain and the United States, the zeal to implement an ill-secured UN Resolution 1973 was seen by many peace-loving people as brazen aggression targeted at Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi, regardless of the mixed feelings about the man.
Resolution 1973 was supposedly about protecting Libyan civilians from what the West said was a “pending genocide,” undoubtedly pending in the minds of Sarkozy, Cameron and Obama, but never as apparent in Libya itself.
Surprisingly, the propaganda line that Gaddafi was about to carry out a gruesome genocide in Benghazi was bought by the likes of Noam Chomsky even, a veteran who should know better about what comes from the lips of US presidents, especially when they are pronouncing a war. Before long, Operation Odyssey was unsurprisingly taken over by NATO, and what many regarded as crude aggression by two rogue states was elevated to an outright terror campaign.
With the help of NATO aerial firepower, the small group of Benghazi rebels began to gather courage and began capturing Libyan cities, coercing many civilians to join their cause or be shot dead; in fact killing as many as 50 000 they accused of either supporting Muammar Gaddafi or being his spies or mercenaries, especially the dark skinned citizens of Libya.The statistics are estimates from various independent sources.
After the rebels entered and rampaged Tripoli, of course following in the footsteps of a devastating NATO team of murderous warplanes, the massive crowds that had earlier been seen turning out in their hundreds of thousands in support of Gaddafi, defiantly waving Libya’s green flag; were all but intimidated into silence by NATO’s indiscriminate terror bombings, strategically followed by a newly-assembled group of heavily armed rebels brandishing brand new high-tech military hardware fresh from American military warehouses. The rag tag rebels even masqueraded as trained soldiers in their brand new military fatigues.
Talk of rebels who know no war. It no longer mattered that the majority of the rebels were untrained activists who hardly knew how to handle a gun.
The fact that these untrained and over-excited goons were coming under the cover of marauding NATO warplanes was good enough a threat to make the Gaddafi forces and their legion of supporters flee Tripoli’s defence posts. Even Gaddafi’s residence was left unguarded; and NATO grazed the compound to smithereens ahead of the rebels. It would have been foolhardy to stand against the high-tech bombs.
The rebels have had the temerity to brazenly demand the loyalty of people who clearly do not support their cause in Sirte, and we have Africans cheering as these innocent civilians are told to comply with NATO demands or be bombed to ashes.
Other cities threatened with terror attacks include Zawiya and Bani Walid. This is so much for respecting the will of the Libyan people, as the rhetoric has been sounding from the cave mouth of Sarkozy.
From the start of this Western coordinated armed insurgence the rebels have been intimidating Libyans into supporting their cause, forcing people to surrender to their will, all the way until they managed to intimidate the people of Tripoli into submission, proceeding to do the same in all other cities where civilians had publicly vowed to fight the Western backed aggression.
NATO is ready to continue with its war crimes and terror attacks on the people of Libya and our eyes are supposed to be glued to the fiction of a monstrous Gaddafi whose grip on Libyans we are told had become so much of an unbearable hell, a hell that provided free health care, free education, free housing and interest free loans for the Libyan folk.
We hear the people of Libya want a new dispensation without Gaddafi and one would hope that the rebels would meet celebrating masses at the gates of Sirte, Tripoli and the other cities to the West and South of Libya. What we saw were marauding gun trotting goons and an entirely intimidated population.
All we have seen are brutalising NATO terror planes and a legion of Western armed thugs waiting to destroy the civilians of the cities of the so-called “Gaddafi loyalists,” should they fail to denounce Gaddafi and support the Benghazi cause.
On the sidelines of the terror attacks on Libya we saw France holding a summit it dubbed the “Friends of Libya” conference. The sole purpose of this summit was to legitimise the so-called National Transitional Council and to give the false impression that the war in Libya is over and done with, that the rebels are the new authority in that country.
The hopelessly useless African Union temporarily woke up from its slumber and refused to be party to this sham conference, complaining that fighting had not ended, and that UN Resolution 1973 was about protecting civilians and not attacking them, as the case is with the situation in Sirte and other cities still controlled by supporters of Muammar Gaddafi. The AU argues that there should be a ceasefire to allow negotiations for a peaceful resolution of the crisis.
Jacob Zuma, Goodluck Jonathan and Gabon’s Ali Bongo Ondimba are the triumvirate gang of traitors that first betrayed the African cause by rashly voting for Resolution 1973 without due consideration for possible ramifications, even ignoring the agreed position of the African Union.
Zuma tells us that he and his sleepy colleagues thought Resolution 1973 was about protecting Libyan civilians from pending Gaddafi attacks, not about NATO or Western powers joining one side of the conflict while disarming the other. Well, foolishness is no defence, much as it is clearly Zuma’s trade mark.
South Africans are demanding an explanation and many Nigerians are not happy with Jonathan’s choice of voting for war against Libya in their name. Bongo knows well how to silence dissent. He takes after his dad.
We must however understand the doctrinal framework of Western elites tyrannising Libyans today. To do so it is important that we attend to the thinking that lie behind the policy choices of the Western Coalition.
We may want to start by understanding Kennedy’s Indochina war and its aftermath.Kennedy adopted doctrines already established; the very way Obama is adopting the same well established doctrines in the US tradition.
One important aspect of these doctrines is the unacceptability of too much independence, often described as “radical nationalism” – something Gaddafi was seen as an addict to.
Gaddafi was seen as a buffer standing in the way of Western interests as targeted at the greater picture of Africa. His dramas at the EU-Africa summits held in recent years did not help matters.He was always outstanding, whether it was in calling for the United States of Africa, calling for the unifying of the African currency, calling for the establishment of an independent African Bank, campaigning for the abandoning of the US dollar in oil trade, or stating that African leaders would always attend these EU Summits with the Western-hated Robert Mugabe, or else they would not attend altogether, a threat he promised Africa would carry out just before the 2007 Lisbon EU-Africa Summit.
Gaddafi became the proverbial “rotten apple” who enhanced the need to eliminate the “infection” before it spread. Just like Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam was eager to co-operate with the US and the West so was Muammar Gaddafi in the last decade of his reign; supposing the NATO terror attacks have successfully ousted the Libyan leader. Just like Ho, Gaddafi’s cooperation did not meet the required terms of subordination. It is no easy walk playing puppet politics to the West. Agreeing to torture alleged terror suspects from Britain and the United States was not good enough in terms of pleasing Gaddafi’s newly found friends from the West. Even granting generous oil contracts to the West was not good enough.
Top policy makers in the West still feared Libyan independence might fan anti-West Pan-Africanistic tendencies; undermining the close association between Sub-Saharan African countries and the “powers which have been long responsible for their welfare,” to quote a Kennedy era US official in reference to the Indochina peoples.
In Indochina the responsible authority was France, whose tender loving care left the countries devastated and starving. Ironically it is again France’s tender loving care for Libyan civilians that has today left the people of Libya devastated, intimidated, raped, and starved as supply lines are cut off to elicit compliance with the rebels and their Western masters – the brutal tactic being used on Sirte right now, as the leadership vow not to recognise the NTC.
The West’s right to restore “a peaceful transition to democracy” in Libya is axiomatic. It follows that any problems and challenges that may arise can be attributed to the need to eliminate the alleged tyranny of Gaddafi. So the people of Sirte, Bani Walid or Tripoli can be bombed into submission in the name of eliminating Gaddafi’s “tyrannical rule.”
According to Western thinking, it is independent nationalism that causes friction, not imperial concerns. The traditional “strategic economic interests” of the industrialised countries must always prevail when independent nationalism interferes with the West’s global plans. So it is the ambitious projects of Gaddafi that cause friction, not the West’s greed for the resources of other nations, those of Libya included.
The African Union has unsuccessfully called for a negotiated diplomatic solution to the conflict in Libya, something the US, France and Britain have vehemently opposed. The only reason they are opposed to this proposal is they want to ensure that the outcome of this conflict produces a government that is pliant to Western powers.
It is exactly the same logic that makes Western leaders vow never to recognise any winner of Zimbabwean elections who is not Morgan Tsvangirai and his MDC-T party – regardless of the fairness and freeness of the election.
Libya has shown us who the actual terrorists in international affairs are. NATO is the biggest terrorist organisation on earth today, with its partnering Al-Qaeda standing as a pea next to a mountain.
It is just as good that NATO and Al-Qaeda are operating side by side in Libya, like the Mafia Don and his runner. Africa we are one and together we shall overcome. It is homeland or death!!
Result
NATO extends its aggression on Libya to the end of the year
NATO agreed on Wednesday to a three-month extension of its illegal bombing campaign in Libya. The agreement on the continuation of the military aggression against the sovereign North African country came at a meeting of ambassadors of the 28 NATO states in Brussel.
On Tuesday, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen already said during conference at UN headquarters in New York that the mandate, which is interpreted by the US-led NATO as an excuse to allow its terror bombing on Libya, will remain in place until revoked by the UN Security Council.
Rasmussen called the Western aggression on Libya which has killed thousands of Libyan civilians including three baby grandchildren of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi and destroyed much of the country’s civilian and public services infrastructure including a huge water supply and a television station “effective”.
NATO launched the illegal war with aerial bombardment, drone and missile strikes on Libya in mid-March, saying the UN Security Council Resolution 1973 gave them a mandate to bomb the country to demand demand a no-fly zone to “protect the Libyan civilians”.
Under this “protecting” guise, the U.S. military, NATO, and the United Nations took part in the bombing of Libya, claiming to support a so-called popular and spontaneous protest which for many obvious reasons has been a CIA operation from the beginning.
With NATO still carrying out daily bombing raids in a desparate attempt to kill the Libyan leader, reports of massacres and atrocities committed by the rebels who represent the so-called “new democratic Libya” continue to mount, many of them directed against the large numbers of sub-Saharan African migrant workers who have been killed, abused and detained solely on the basis of the color of their skin.
Meanwhile Muammar Qaddafi on Tuesday called on the Libyan people to be patient and have faith, saying: “What is happening now in Libya is a charade which can only take place because of the NATO air raids, which will not last forever. When they have left the traitors will be gone too.”
Opinion of Libyan people
Though The Bible tells us “Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth” (Proverbs 24:17), I could not help myself. I was happy. Muammar Qaddafi was the enemy of every decent person in the world. He was one of the worst tyrants in recent memory.
This fact was hidden behind a façade of clownishness. But basically he was a ruthless dictator, surrounded by corrupt relatives and cronies, squandering the great wealth of Libya.
This was obvious to anyone who wanted to see. Unfortunately, there were quite a few who chose to close their eyes.
WHEN I expressed my support for the international intervention, I was expecting to be attacked by some well-meaning people. I was not disappointed. I have been through this before. When NATO started to bomb Serbian territory in order to put an end to Slobodan Milosevic’s crimes in Kosovo, many of my political friends turned against me.
Didn’t I realize that it was all an imperialist plot?
This was said when the evidence of the gruesome mass-murder in Bosnia was there for everyone to see. But their hatred of the US and of NATO was so strong, so fervent, that anyone attacked by them must surely be a benefactor of humanity, and all accusations against them pure fabrications. The same happened with Pol Pot.
Now it has happened again. I was bombarded with messages from well-meaning people who lauded Qaddafi for all his good deeds.
While the rebels were already fighting their way into his huge personal compound, the socialist leader of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, was praising him as a true model of upright humanity, a man who dared to stand up to the American aggressors.
Well, sorry, count me out. I have this irrational abhorrence of bloody dictators, of genocidal mass-murderers, of leaders who wage war on their own people. And at my advanced age, it is difficult for me to change. I am ready to support even the devil, if that is necessary to put an end to this kind of atrocities. I won’t even ask about his precise motives. Whatever one may think about the US and/or NATO — if they disarm a Milosevic or a Qaddafi, they have my blessing.
How large a role did NATO play in the defeat of the Libyan dictator? The rebels would not have reached Tripoli, and certainly not by now, if they had not enjoyed NATO’s sustained air support. Libya is one big desert. The offensive had to rely on one long road. Without mastery of the skies, the rebels would have been massacred. Anyone who was alive during World War II and followed the campaigns of Rommel and Montgomery knows this.
I assume that the rebels also received arms and advice to facilitate their advance.
But I object to the patronizing assertion that it was all a NATO victory. It is the old colonialist attitude in a new guise. Of course, these poor, primitive Arabs could not do anything without the White Man shouldering his burden and rushing to the rescue.
But wars are not won by weapons, they are won by people. Even with all the help they got, the Libyan rebels, disorganized and poorly armed as they were, have won a remarkable victory. This would not have happened without real revolutionary fervor, without bravery and determination. It is a Libyan victory, not a British or a French one.
This has been underplayed by the international media. Journalists did not acquit themselves with glory. On TV they looked ridiculous with their conspicuous helmets when they were surrounded by bareheaded fighters.
What came over was endless jubilations over victories that had seemingly fallen from heaven. But these were feats achieved by people — yes, by Arab people. This is especially galling to our Israeli “military correspondents” and “Arab affairs experts”. Used to despising or hating “the Arabs”, they are ascribing the victory to NATO. It seems that the people of Libya played a minor role, if any.
Now they blabber endlessly about the “tribes”, which will make democracy and orderly governance in Libya impossible. Libya is not really a country, it was never a unified state before becoming an Italian colony, there is no such thing as a Libyan people. (Remember the French saying this about Algeria, and Golda Meir about Palestine?)
Well, for a people that does not exist, the Libyans fought very well. And as for the “tribes” — why do tribes exist only in Africa and Asia, never among Europeans? Why not a Welsh tribe or a Bavarian tribe?
The “tribes” of Libya would be called in Europe “ethnic groups” and in Israel “communities”. The term “tribe” has a patronizing connotation. Let’s drop it.
All those who decry NATO’s intervention must answer a simple question: Who else would have done the job?
21st century humanity cannot tolerate acts of genocide and mass-murder, wherever they occur. It cannot look on while dictators butcher their own peoples. The doctrine of “noninterference in the internal affairs of sovereign states” belongs to the past. We Jews, who have accused mankind of standing idly by while millions of Jews, including German citizens, were exterminated by the legitimate German government, certainly owe the world an answer.
I have mentioned in the past that I advocate some form of effective world governance and expect it to be in place by the end of this century. This would include a democratically elected world executive that would have military forces at its disposal and that could intervene, if a world parliament so decides.
For this to happen, the United Nations must be revamped entirely. The veto power must be abolished. It is intolerable that the US can veto the acceptance of Palestine as a member state, or that Russia and China can veto intervention in Syria.
Certainly, great powers like the US and China should have a louder voice than, say, Luxemburg and the Fiji Islands, but a two thirds majority in the General Assembly should have the power to override Washington, Moscow or Beijing. That may be the music of the future, or, some may say, a pipe dream. As for now, we live in a very imperfect world and must make do with the instruments we have. NATO, alas, is one of them. The European Union is another, though in this case poor, eternally conscience-stricken Germany, has paralyzed it. If Russia or China were to join, that would be fine.
This is not some remote problem. Qaddafi is finished, but Bashar Assad is not. He is butchering his people even while you read this, and the world is looking on helplessly.
Impact
Parts of the border between Algeria and Libya have reportedly been closed after Muammar Gaddafi’s closest family members were confirmed to have fled to the country on Tuesday.
Gaddafi’s wife Safiya, their daughter Aisha and sons Hannibal and Mohammed arrived in Algeria on Monday, the Syrian state news agency APS has said.AFP reported that Aisha Gaddafi had given birth after she crossed the border.
Algeria closed parts of its long stretching border with Libya on Tuesday, the local El Watan newspaper reported after the new Libyan government, the National Transitional Council (NTC), condemned the Algerian authorities for accepting the ousted dictator’s relatives.
The NTC may seek extradition to bring the Gaddafi family to justice, it has also been reported.
“Especially for Hannibal, if he fled to Algiers and the Algerian authorities allowed him to do that, we’ll consider this as an agressive act against the Libyan people’s wish,” Mahmoud Shammam, NTC information minister, said.
“We’re going to use all the means to get him back and try him, put him in a court and try him. This is our aim. We would give everybody of the Gaddafi family a fair trial and we can guarantee that.”
But Algeria’s envoy to the United Nations defended the decision to take in the Gaddafis saying it was a “holy rule of hospitality” to provide assistance.Mourad Benmehidi told the BBC World Service that his nation had a duty to provide assistance.
“In fact in many parts of the Sahara region it’s mandatory by law to provide assistance to anyone in the desert,” he told the broadcaster.
Relations between Algeria and the NTC were strained before the Gaddafi family fled. The NTC previously accused Algeria of sending mercenaries to fight for Gaddafi, while Algeria’s autocratic regime has resisted calls to recognise the legitimacy of the NTC and repressed protests within its own country. Elsewhere in Libya senior rebel commanders reported that another of Gaddafi’s sons, Khamis, had been killed.
“We have almost certain information that Khamis Gaddafi and Abdullah al-Senussi (his intelligence chief) were killed on Saturday by a unit of the national liberation army during clashes in Tarhouna,” spokesman Ahmed Bani told Al Arabiya television.Khamis Gaddafi has been reported dead twice before since the uprisings began earlierthis year, however, and the deaths remain unconfirmed.
Meanwhile fighting in the country continued on Tuesday, focused mainly around Gaddafi’s hometown of Sirte where it has been rumoured that the dictator may be hiding.
Nato said that it hit 35 targets in airstrikes on Monday, including four radar sites and 22 armed vehicles in Sirte alone.An ammunition storage facility and two command centres near to Bani Walid were also hit, as were five anti-aircraft artillery sites and other military installations close to Hun.Sky News reporter Neal Mann said via Twitter that Nato jets were also seen in the skies above Libya on Tuesday.In other parts of the country the Libyan people were working to recover from the fighting. In Tripoli, fireworks replaced celebratory gunfire in Martyrs’ Square on Monday evening.
A document was also leaked that appeared to document plans by the United Nations to leave up to 200 military observers and 190 police on the ground to help shore-up Libya’s post-conflict recovery.
In another sign of the growing, though fragile, stability in the capital, the UK Foreign Office has said that it is working to reestablish an embassy there as a reflection of recent “progress”.
Libya’s leader Muammar Qaddafi has managed to survive and put up fierce resistance for now half a year against NATO aggression and their Al Qaeda led rebel forces on the ground. Tripoli is still unsecured, and entire cities still stand firmly in defiance against constant NATO bombing and multiple attempts by “thousands of rebels” to surround and starve out cities. Libyans have also now fended off several full fledged assaults by an increasingly disorganized rebel army on the cities of Sirte and Bani Walid.
The cracks are beginning to show in NATO’s proxy army, the so-called Libyan rebels hailing from Libya’s eastern Cyrenaica region, notorious as the most concentrated recruiting ground for international terrorism on earth and the home of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), listed as a foreign terrorist organization by both the US State Department and the UK Home Office. In recent weeks, it has become impossible for the corporate media and NATO to hide the fact that the rebels are being led by LIFG commanders. It is also increasingly impossible to hide these terrorists’ atrocities as they literally exile or exterminate entire cities. The London Telegraph has finally admitted in short that the rebels are in fact genocidal racists. In the Telegraph’s article “Gaddafi’s ghost town after the loyalists retreat,” it is reported that rebels have taken the city of Tawarga, where the entire civilian population was either killed, rounded up, or exiled, all motivated by a “racist undercurrent.”
However, one thing NATO is still trying to hide, with the full cooperation of the corporate media, is that they are now on the eve of their September 19 deadline requiring their campaign to once again go in front of the UNSC for review. UK and France’s Cameron and Sarkozy were allegedly in Tripoli along side warmongering imposter “intellectual” Bernard-Henri Levy, to quickly cement their open-ended commitment to the Benghazi terrorists, so as to permanently head off any previously self-imposed deadlines. Like the entire UN resolution, the deadline and review process were there merely for show, and turn out to be yet another self-contrived mechanism to lend credibility and legitimacy for an otherwise illegitimate military intervention. Libyan rebel leader Mustafa Abdel Jalil could be seen walking literally arm-in-arm with Sarkozy and Cameron, with Levy skulking in the background, a truly disparaging, disgraceful, and treasonous imperial display for the entire continent of Africa, which is now standing once again on the edge of Western recolonization.
Treason. Libyan rebel “leader” Jalil is flanked, arm-in-arm, on his right by UK’s David Cameron, and on his left by France’s Nicolas Sarkozy, with just over his left shoulder, Bernard Levy walking behind him, a venomous pro-war lobbyist masquerading as a “philosopher” or “intellectual.” This meager imperial parade easily doubles as a symbol for the attempted destruction of Libyan sovereignty.
Qaddafi’s stubborn resistance against NATO is still threatening to collapse their efforts to seize Libya. Qaddafi’s resistance has been so stubborn in fact, that it has tied up NATO’s increasingly limited and ineffective resources long enough for other nations weathering similar Wall Street/London sponsored destabilizations to prevail against the foreign-funded unrest besieging them. Syria for example, has seemingly “broken the back” of armed terrorists operating under the cover of the corporate media’s “peaceful protester” narrative. Reported first by geopolitical expert Dr. Webster Tarpley, the corporate media is now slowly conceding that indeed, Syria has worked its way out from under a clearly US-contrived “rebellion.” With Libya’s outcome still unclear, even a victory now would be Pyrrhic, and NATO hard pressed to use the “Libya precedence” as a means to sell intervention in Syria or Iran.
Other attempts to sow chaos and rebellion by the West in nations like Algeria have already failed, and the grand prize of starting renewed violence and unrest in Iran has fallen flat. Increasingly desperate, it looks as if Wall Street and London are preparing to play their last, and most desperate card – region wide violence centered around Israel. Attempts have been made throughout the entire “Arab Spring” to use understandable regional, even international contempt for the Israeli government as bait to legitimize and energize the “Arab Spring.” This could be seen in false claims and rumors promoted by Western and Israeli media including that Israel was “shipping arms” to save Hosni Mubarak’s regime in Egypt, or that Israeli-funded mercenaries were “assisting Qaddafi in Libya,” and even that Qaddafi was “Jewish” and could seek refuge in Israel under Israeli law. Israeli press has also tried the cartoonish claim that Syria’s Assad was Israel’s “favorite Arab dictator of all” in an effort to undermine him politically.
Whatever avenue Wall Street and London take now, it is quite clear their narrative of a “democratic dawn” across the Middle East is dead and buried, and the proponents of this disingenuous campaign left in a weakened and vulnerable position. Like many wild animals, an injured Anglo-American imperium is perhaps in its most dangerous and unpredictable state. For Sarkozy and Cameron to risk a trip to Tripoli shows how desperate the West is to “wrap up” in Libya and move on, despite the tactical realities on the ground there, and in their proposed next “project.” With the burning of an Israeli embassy in Cairo, and protests being organized in Jordan ahead of a vote on Palestinian statehood – it appears that the Israeli government, after long playing a more muted role in the Wall Street/London “Arab Spring” is about to take center stage.
Readers would serve themselves well by objectively examining everything involving Israel in the coming days, weeks, and months, as the global elite have carefully cultivated divisions, hatred, and predictable ploys all centered around emotions people harbor for the government of Israel, a contrived and contemptible Middle Eastern bastion of Western interests, a bane to both the Israeli people and their neighbors. Objectivity was abandoned in the early stages of the “Arab Spring” and it was easily sold as an “anti-Israel,” “anti-American” uprising, drawing in many well meaning people to support what was in fact a US ploy. The facts now clearly show that from the beginning, even years before the first protests in Tunisia or Egypt, the West was training, funding, equipping and preparing armies of youth, armed militants, and political proxy parties for the 2011 “Arab Spring.” Likewise, emotions regarding Israel and the very real transgressions of its government against its neighbors will be leveraged to full effect again in this next, more desperate stage of the “Arab Spring.”
It is important to see past these emotionally charged gambits and uncover the true ploy unfolding. It is also important to separate the people of Israel and even members of the Israeli government who are just as appalled at the prevailing militant posture the nation has taken, and just as dedicated to ending the injustices the billion-dollar US-funded Israeli military commits on a daily basis – separated from those willfully leading Israel and its neighbors to ruin on behalf of their Wall Street and London corporate-financier sponsors.
Conclusion
The Chadian–Libyan conflict was a state of sporadic warfare events in Chad between 1978 and 1987 between Libyan and Chadian forces. Libya had been involved in Chad’s internal affairs prior to 1978 and before Muammar Gaddafi’s rise to power in Libya in 1969, beginning with the extension of the Chadian Civil War to northern Chad in 1968.The conflict was marked by a series of four separate Libyan interventions in Chad, taking place in 1978, 1979, 1980–1981 and 1983–1987. In all of these occasions Gaddafi had the support of a number of factions participating in the civil war, while Libya’s opponents found the support of the French government, which intervened militarily to save the Chadian government in 1978, 1983 and 1986.
The military pattern of the war delineated itself in 1978, with the Libyans providing armour, artillery and air support and their Chadian allies the infantry, that assumed the bulk of the scouting and fighting.[5] This pattern was radically changed in 1986, towards the end of the war, when all Chadian forces united in opposing the Libyan occupation of northern Chad with a degree of unity that had never been seen before in Chad.[6] This deprived the Libyan forces of their habitual infantry, exactly when they found themselves confronting a mobile army, well provided now with anti-tank and anti-air missiles, thus cancelling the Libyan superiority in fire-power. What followed was the Toyota War, in which the Libyan forces were routed and expelled from Chad, putting an end to the conflict.
Libya is not an important country. It’s important to its people and in its region. It’s a symbol and it’s an indicator. But in a geopolitical sense, it belongs to that list of places like North Korea, Cuba, and Afghanistan that only have gained attention over the years as the platforms of dangerous men. Libya without Qaddafi is unlikely to make headlines for long … unless, yet again, an extremist or an extremist group uses it as a vehicle for their own warped ambitions.
We should not, therefore, be unhappy should Libya ultimately fade from the radar. That would be an encouraging sign. And there are many truly important issues to which we ought to devote our attentions. But we can’t allow ourselves to believe that what is happening in Tripoli is the endgame in that country or allow ourselves the luxury of letting our attention drift away as soon as the celebrations stop.
To understand why, we need only ask what lessons this recent chapter in Libya’s history holds, what conclusions we may draw, and what implications it may have for the world at large.
