News Libya: Rebels Being Slaughtered, no fly zone

[rootX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14709896

The wife and three children of fugitive Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi are in Algeria, Algerian officials say.

While, whereabouts of Gaddafi remains unknown.

 

[lisab]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14709896



While, whereabouts of Gaddafi remains unknown.

Looks like Sirte might be the last holdout. It's Gaddafi's hometown; I wonder if he's there.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/08/2011829134327176660.html"

 

[Dotini]

Ron Paul's statement on Libya and Syria, with which I wholly concur:

http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2011/08/29/mission-accomplished-in-libya/

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

 

[MarcoD]

Ron Paul's statement on Libya and Syria, with which I wholly concur:

http://original.antiwar.com/paul/2011/08/29/mission-accomplished-in-libya/

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

Ah bit too gloomy for my taste.

Despite the fact that there was no US formal government backing; the fact that the US and allies acted within a UN mandate I think actually falls better internationally than if they would have acted more or less completely on their own account.

The support in the Libyan civil war was done mostly by France and the UK, some other NATO members. I doubt many will feel this is a US enterprise. For a change, it was quiet nice to see Arabs cheering for French air support. (Though I have doubts about the UK/French position too, I think they overstretched far beyond their legal UN mandate, but for the moment it looks like their gamble worked out.)

I don't think the US came out any worse in this conflict. I am pretty sure Arabs care more about Israel, Iraq/Afghanistan and drones in Somalia and Yemen than anything else.

Of course the western world wants their oil. But they, Libya, also want our iPhones and German cars. Some will explain it as a big conspiracy for resources, but, in general, there were hardly NATO ground forces present and I think Libyans will respect that we didn't mess too much into internal affairs.

Was Gaddafi that bad? I have no idea. He seems to have a lousy track record of allies (Lockerbie and trying to ally -at some point- with fundamentalist pan-Arab islamic parties come to mind). But he also seems to have a rather good track record of emancipating the OPEC world to get the right value for their oil, repressing Islam fundamentalism, working somewhat towards women's emancipation, letting the people of Libya live within relative wealth, working towards an African emancipated continent (he was an admirer of Mandela), and not gassing part of its population like -for instance- Saddam Hussein did to Kurdish villages. After the Iraq war he was mostly pacified internationally. (Though no doubt he made local victims, but it seems to be in the range of hundreds, not tens of thousands.)

Gaddafi was a dictator and therefor a criminal and therefor the Libyan people are better off without him. They can do better than live under the ruling of a money-grabbing revolutionary. But as a 'cultural phenomenon,' I think I'll actually miss his to me 'amusing' anachronistic speeches and some of his, probably opportunistic, naive political ideas. (For instance, he believed the 'people' can do without political parties since the 'will of the people' will emerge anyway and parties can only be corrupt. It makes me laugh and even sympathize a bit with that.)

It seems to me that the guy just outstayed his visit; they grew tired of him. The only way, for better or worse, is forward.

The first victim of war is the truth - we just don't know what is going on in Libya. I don't like the fact that atrocities seem to be (have been) committed by both parties. There seems to be some, though little, ethnic cleansing of black African people by the rebel side, for example.

Fortunately, it looks that the 'rebel' forces are rather small. I have hardly seen more than fifteen cars at the same place. This makes me wonder whether there are more than 5-10k rebels involved in the whole effort, that's less than 1% of the population. Looks to me that most of the people are just staying at home until the whole storm blows over. I hope that also means that Libya will not deflate into another Somalia, or Iran.

Time will tell.

 

[MarcoD]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-14703372

I find that tone bit troubling.

Who do you expect to be the front runners in a civil war against a dictatorship? Given what they had I expect opportunists, Islamic fundamentalists, some business people, some intellectuals hoping for reform, but, mostly, a bunch of (mostly conservative) ultranationalists.

It doesn't surprise me. I am more worried about that they want to impose a form of Sharia law.

 

[rootX]

Who do you expect to be the front runners in a civil war against a dictatorship? Given what they had I expect opportunists, Islamic fundamentalists, some business people, some intellectuals hoping for reform, but, mostly, a bunch of (mostly conservative) ultranationalists.

It doesn't surprise me. I am more worried about that they want to impose a form of Sharia law.

I believe it will take some years to see who is the winner among opportunists, Islamic fundamentalists, business people, intellectuals*, ultranationalists, or unemployed youths.

*It seems like intellectuals grouped together to form NTC:
http://www.ntclibya.com/InnerPage.aspx?SSID=8&ParentID=3&LangID=1

 

[cobalt124]

So far, the rebels have been united by the common enemy, Gaddafi. I think bringing Libya back to the track (and better than it was under Gaddafi) will be much more difficult than getting rid of Gaddafi.

I hope they stay united under centralized government once Gaddafi is killed.

Hopefully the common aim is an open democratic free Libya, if that's the case there is reason to still be optimistic, though that outcome in recent conflicts hasn't beeen the form.

I find that tone bit troubling.

Maybe, but its just words at the moment, the situation may change. I think its positive that they feel they can assert this (and other things) rather than tow the western line.

 

[MarcoD]

I believe it will take some years to see who is the winner among opportunists, Islamic fundamentalists, business people, intellectuals*, ultranationalists, or unemployed youths.

*It seems like intellectuals grouped together to form NTC:
http://www.ntclibya.com/InnerPage.aspx?SSID=8&ParentID=3&LangID=1

The thing is that I have absolutely no idea how Libya works. From what was quoted from the Green Book on Dutch radio, the doctrine was a hodge podge of socialism, marxism, anarchy, and romantic renaissance ideas which has its root in a (strong) conservative form of the bedouin (muslim) life style.

The society itself seems to be ruled as an anarchy with (dictatorial) revolutionary councils which make sure that everything 'runs' right.

To me, from the little I know, that feels like a odd mixture between the Wild West, anarchy, socialist capitalism and Islam Arab culture. If you take some of the culture and the revolutionary part out, I think most people in the US would feel right at home. (No government, no debt, free education.) Given how people are dressed, I think Gadaffi even didn't do very bad there (except for the murdering and repression of course).

The thing is that intellectuals can be conservative religious people, I think the head member studied Sharia law.

The fact that the majority of Libya is young, and for North-Africa, well-educated, doesn't mean a lot. A (humanist) democracy is the result of centuries of work. I don't expect a lot from young people who were educated under a revolutionary dictatorship (and look at other Arab nations, and get a lot wrong about western worlds).

As I stated in another thread, I am an empathic humanist. Try to explain that to a Libyan.

Of course, I will defend the right of everyone to be religious, or have their own life style, but I do find the Sharia sexist, gender discriminatory, and overly punative. (With all respect, the recognition that it has pretty normal, advanced, and morally right parts, and the acknowledgment that I know little about it.) Anyway, basing a law system on religion [where you can't opt out] to me doesn't feels like a step forward for a young population.

We can't do it, but in my heart I wouldn't mind freezing foreign Libyan accounts to press them to have no referral to Sharia in the constitution as a manner of protecting the public.

EDIT: To me it looks like the population just got fed up with the dictatorship, the revolutionary rhetoric, the fact that Gadaffi was grabbing money, and the fact that he was spending billions in Africa [instead of solving unemployment].

 

[cobalt124]

Ron Paul's statement on Libya and Syria, with which I wholly concur: http://original.antiwar.com/paul/201...shed-in-libya/

U.S. internal politics aside, for once the world decided, for whatever reason(s), and (IMO) did the right thing. Obama was neither isolationist or imperialist, but (again IMO) did the right thing. I don't see ground troops going into Libya, they are not even wanted by the Libyans. Syria is a totally different issue, I don't see how the U.S. could, even if they wanted too, bomb or invade Syria.

Despite the fact that there was no US formal government backing; the fact that the US and allies acted within a UN mandate I think actually falls better internationally than if they would have acted more or less completely on their own account.

I don't think the US came out any worse in this conflict.

Agreed

...But he also seems to have a rather good track record of emancipating the OPEC world to get the right value for their oil...working towards an African emancipated continent...

This would be good for the Middle East and Africa and hopefully they will continue to do this.

...repressing Islam fundamentalism...

He had his uses to the West.

...working somewhat towards women's emancipation...letting the people of Libya live within relative wealth...he was an admirer of Mandela...

I wouldn't give him credit for these myself, any real good would have been purely incidental, and his motives elsewhere.

...and not gassing part of its population...Though no doubt he made local victims, but it seems to be in the range of hundreds, not tens of thousands...

I suspect we may find otherwise what has happened over forty years.

Time will tell.

I'm still optimistic.

 

[MarcoD]

I agree with everything, except for this:

I wouldn't give him credit for these myself, any real good would have been purely incidental, and his motives elsewhere.

The actions of Gadaffi are mostly explained in western media as opportunistic. Obviously, the murders [, terrorism] and repression are easily condemnable, and I agree with that. But I just don't know about the 'opportunistic' rest, or whether it is even valid to explain his action in 'opportunistic' terms (we can just as easily do that for all actions of the west).

Given the murders and terrorist attacks, it is easy to condemn him on all of his other actions, but I prefer to believe that we just don't know, and that the best way of viewing him is as a revolutionary, and that on an international scale, the man is a criminal, but not as big a criminal as he could have been, or other repressive regimes are, or were.

For instance, he could also have led his people into a military march of the people, and pull of a massive genocide on intellectuals (China), or against a part of the population (Kosovo/Iraq/Rwanda). As far as we know, he didn't do that.

I'm still optimistic.

Me too. But there are also large obstacles to be overtaken.

Iraq democracy seems to have failed (which was explained in Dutch media) as that the people just don't know what democracy is, see it as an opportunistic/nepotistic enterprise, and just vote for the people who will allow them the maximal number of favors.
[How to avoid this from happening in a country which has virtually no democratic legacy?]

USSR's overturn to capitalism seems to have brought forth another one party state where individuals just seized control of privatized parts of the state, and now there are multi-billionairs without having to show anything for it.
[How to avoid individual council members from just seizing parts of the oil production rights or machinery?]

Iran's overturn brought forth a repressive fundamentalist Islam state.
[How to avoid a fundamentalist scenario when there is no alternative in a democratic 'void' except for conservative Islamism?]

Somalia degraded into total anarchy.
[How to avoid this in a country without an army, government, but with lots of armed individuals?]

All these scenarios are there. I hope for the best too.

 

[Proton Soup]

I believe it will take some years to see who is the winner among opportunists, Islamic fundamentalists, business people, intellectuals*, ultranationalists, or unemployed youths.

*It seems like intellectuals grouped together to form NTC:
http://www.ntclibya.com/InnerPage.aspx?SSID=8&ParentID=3&LangID=1

which ones are the intellectuals? from the only two with bios there, the theme seems to be privatization. which to me simply means business.

 

[MarcoD]

which ones are the intellectuals? from the only two with bios there, the theme seems to be privatization. which to me simply means business.

I doubt this is true. A substantial part of the Arab attributes the 'moral degradation' of the western world to secularization and capitalism. I doubt privatization will be the theme.

 

[rootX]

which ones are the intellectuals? from the only two with bios there, the theme seems to be privatization. which to me simply means business.

Most of the members, including the chairman, are doctorate holders, which I took to be equivalent of intellectuals.Today's update:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14774533

US and UK spy agencies built close ties with their Libyan counterparts during the so-called War on Terror, according to documents discovered at the office of Col Gaddafi's former spy chief.

There was also one news about NTC attempting to control young rebels.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14770357

Libya's new civilian leaders are beginning the process of restoring order in Tripoli after the revolution.

But there are large numbers of armed young rebel soldiers on the streets of Tripoli who have moved into the power vacuum created by Col Gaddafi overthrow, says our correspondent, and the NTC is now gradually persuading them to go home.

NTC is claiming that most rebels are doctors/engineers/lawyers who can return to their normal lives. This is contrary to what Gaddafi called these rebels in his early speeches, "young people duped with drugs and alcohol".

 

[leontd]

Unbelievable, why doesn't the UN do something about it?

 

[Dotini]

I find it amusing that we are now reported to be supporting some of the very same people we used to torture and kill. On the surface this might seem inconsistent.

http://news.antiwar.com/2011/09/03/cia-cooperated-with-gadhafi-on-torture-and-renditions/
The Central Intelligence Agency rendered terrorism suspects to Muammar Gadhafi’s Libya, knowing they would be tortured, according to documents uncovered in Tripoli.

The documents were found by the Human Rights Watch in the abandoned offices of Libya’s former spy chief and foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, a notorious figure known for repressing Libyan dissidents.

One of those rendered and tortured, Abdel Hakim Belhadj, is now the military commander in Tripoli for the rebels’ Transitional National Council. ”He was captured by the CIA in Asia and put on a secret flight back to Libya where he was interrogated and tortured by the Libyan security services,” Human Rights Watch’s Peter Bouckaert told Reuters.

Belhadji claims he was tortured by the CIA, and then tortured again at Tripoli’s notorious Abu Salim prison after rendition. He is also reportedly a former member of al Qaeda. That he is now part of a provisional government supported by the US indicates a stark inconsistency in American foreign policy.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

 

[Proton Soup]

we also rendered people to libya's next-door neighbor, egypt. so it's hardly surprising to me.

of course, the interesting thing is how the propaganda machine spins up so easily every time the government picks a new target.

 

[MarcoD]

we also rendered people to libya's next-door neighbor, egypt. so it's hardly surprising to me.

of course, the interesting thing is how the propaganda machine spins up so easily every time the government picks a new target.

The thing is whether, for instance, a TV is a

1. a box into the world,
2. a box of hedonism,
3. or a box of quality sold products.

One of the criticism to the US in its dealing with 9/11 was that TV (or newspaper) is too much a mix of 1 and 3, and therefor the media took too much of a national war-pushing spin since wars sell better. (Not that our media is that better, we have a mix between 1 and 2.)

It's not a propaganda machine I think. IMO, it's an effect of telling people what they want to hear, and a majority just wants the 'easy' story.

 

[cobalt124]

...But there are also large obstacles to be overtaken...

The arab Spring is an opportunity to wipe the slate and do things differently. Let's hope we take it. Think I'll also take a look at Al Jazeera English for a different perspective on Gadaffi.

 

[rootX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14876028

While Algeria accepted Qaddafi's wife, Niger accepted the convey which had his son, Saadi Gaddafi

Niger's government spokesman and Justice Minister Marou Amadou said Saadi Gaddafi was in a convoy along with eight others. Mr Amadou said the convoy was on its way to Agadez in northern Niger and that Saadi and his companions were being allowed in on humanitarian grounds.

The US has urged Niger to detain any individuals who may be sought fro prosecution by the new authorities in Tripoli and confiscate their weapons and money.

Currently, NTC seems to have some troubles with its these two neighbors.

 

[rootX]

The thing is that intellectuals can be conservative religious people, I think the head member studied Sharia law.

The fact that the majority of Libya is young, and for North-Africa, well-educated, doesn't mean a lot. A (humanist) democracy is the result of centuries of work. I don't expect a lot from young people who were educated under a revolutionary dictatorship (and look at other Arab nations, and get a lot wrong about western worlds).

As I stated in another thread, I am an empathic humanist. Try to explain that to a Libyan.

Of course, I will defend the right of everyone to be religious, or have their own life style, but I do find the Sharia sexist, gender discriminatory, and overly punative. (With all respect, the recognition that it has pretty normal, advanced, and morally right parts, and the acknowledgment that I know little about it.) Anyway, basing a law system on religion [where you can't opt out] to me doesn't feels like a step forward for a young population.

We can't do it, but in my heart I wouldn't mind freezing foreign Libyan accounts to press them to have no referral to Sharia in the constitution as a manner of protecting the public.

EDIT: To me it looks like the population just got fed up with the dictatorship, the revolutionary rhetoric, the fact that Gadaffi was grabbing money, and the fact that he was spending billions in Africa [instead of solving unemployment].

Jalil said it clear in his latest speech: "We are a Muslim people for a moderate Islam"

"We are a Muslim nation, with a moderate Islam, and we will maintain that. You are with us and support us - you are our weapon against whoever tries to hijack the revolution," he said.

But he also warned against secularism, envisaging a state "where sharia [Islamic law] is the main source for legislation".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14894264

 

[cobalt124]

Jalil said it clear in his latest speech: "We are a Muslim people for a moderate Islam"

From what I have read they seem to be making the right sounds and doing the right things, inviting all including enemies to take part and have a say in Libyas future. A democratic, moderate Islamic state sounds positive, I could even see an implementation of Shariah Law as acceptable, as Libyans are already used to good education and equality for women relative to the rest of Africa, I don't see them going back on that. They seem genuine.

 

[rootX]

I thought it would more appropriate to discuss this here.

yeah, I'm pretty convinced at this point that the "crossfire" story is just a cover. (who knows the weapon caliber in a crossfire?) you're right, it is quite problematic to be claiming you want a less tribal, more democratic future, only to keep on doing business as usual.

I doubt "Libya" is claiming for a more democratic future. There is NTC but then I have never come across any source determining how much influence NTC has over rebels and tribes.

 

[Proton Soup]

I thought it would more appropriate to discuss this here.



I doubt "Libya" is claiming for a more democratic future. There is NTC but then I have never come across any source determining how much influence NTC has over rebels and tribes.

i haven't paid that much attention to the NTC, to be honest. it was mentioned earlier in this thread, and the thing that caught my eye right away was the top two guys being privatization experts. and, well, there was a new bank formed, but i can't remember if it was affiliated directly with NTC or just a mechanism for rebels to receive funds seized from Gaddafi (something that never happened during the time we were discussing this).

i was a lot more interested in just who was fighting this war. there was never serious effort to finance the rebels. NATO fought this war, and rebels got photo ops.

it's worth discussing, but i'd have to dig around first.

 

[Dotini]

- A year ago Libya was a member in good standing of the UN. It had a head of state, in place for 40 years.

- A portion of the population rose up in revolt. If a portion of the population of the US, Britain, Russia or China rose up in revolt, it would be instantly suppressed by the constituted and recognized government. But anyway, the UN saw fit to issue a mandate to protect civilians in Libya from harm while the Libyan government attempted to suppress the rebellion.

- NATO took it upon itself to go beyond the mandate, and decided to support and enforce regime change.

- NATO strafed the convoy, and the ex-head of state was killed and dragged through the streets by parties unknown. His body is currently on display in a meat locker for all to see.

- Okay, a bad guy is gone, but what about the rule of law and order, and the presumptive right of a sovereign state to protect itself from violent revolution?

- Is it now okay for unhappy populations anywhere to revolt against their government, and maybe receive protection from the UN and help from NATO?

- Is it now okay for any rejected head of state anywhere to be shot and dragged through the streets and put on display for all to ogle?

- I wonder if a poor example has been set which may come back to haunt us should the shoe be on the other foot?

- If the US and her closest friends are one day no longer the mightiest force on Earth, would it be reasonable to expect outside nations to assist rebels here with weapons, air-cover and intelligence operations to support a revolution, and maybe drag a dead US President around on a rope behind a pick-up?

- Would it be fair to conclude that "might makes right" and "the ends justify the means"? The strong do as they will and the weak do as they must?

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

 

[Adyssa]

Do as we say, not as we do ...

 

[rootX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15530640

Libya's interim authorities have named Tripoli academic Abdurrahim el-Keib as the new prime minister.

It also coincides with the official end of the Nato air campaign that helped overthrow the long-time leader.

Mr Keib, an academic specialising in electrical engineering and based in Tripoli, beat eight other candidates to receive 26 of the 51 votes from members of the NTC.

It will be interesting to see how well a US-UAE educated electrical engineer handles a country like Libya.

 

[rootX]

"Gaddafi's spy chief Abdullah al-Sanussi 'captured'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15812736

"Gaddafi son's capture complicates struggle over cabinet"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15798274

 

[rootX]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16230267

But Libya's competing factions - many of whom remain heavily armed - will want to be sure they get their share of the money, says our correspondent.

I am not sure if adding money to the equation will complicate matters or unify Libya.