Update on Libyan war: April 28

====

Tripoli Bishop: Bombs Striking Everywhere, Italian Government Should Resign

Libya: Robin Hood And Robbers

Several Injured, Perhaps Dead In NATO Air Strike On Libyan Capital

Libya To Take Legal Action Against NATO Over Gaddafi Assassination Attempt

NATO’s Month-Long Air War: 4,100 Sorties, 1,700 Strike Missions

Russia Says EU, NATO Ready To Start Ground Operation In Libya

West Plans Libyan Invasion Under Humanitarian Guise

Libya Trains Volunteer Army To Fight Against NATO Invasion

Bishop Denounces NATO Bombing Campaign In Libya

War Against Libya As Seen From Caribbean, Latin America

Russia, China Oppose Foreign Interference In Syria

Libya: Africa And Politics of Contradictions

====

Tripoli Bishop: Bombs Striking Everywhere, Italian Government Should Resign

http://www.asianews.it/news-en/This-%E2%80%9Cwar-makes-no-sense%E2%80%9D,-the-Italian-govt-should-%E2%80%9Cresign%E2%80%9D,-Tripoli-bishop-says-21417.html

Asia News
April 28, 2011

This “war makes no sense”, the Italian govt should “resign”, Tripoli bishop says

Tripoli: “NATO’s war makes no sense. People want peace. What have people done to deserve all this?” asks Mgr Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli, apostolic vicar of Tripoli. “Targeting military objectives” is crazy because “bombs are striking everywhere,” the prelate said. “We cannot sleep and people are panicking,” he added. “Just last night, there were some explosions just a few kilometres from our area.”

The situation is desperate and the West should stop the war, Mgr Martinelli urged. “We can see women and children crying in the streets. Many Muslim women have come to church crying, asking the Pope to stop the conflict,” the prelate said.

“Bombs solve nothing. NATO and the rebels must stop the military intervention and accept diplomatic talks with the regime,” he explained.

The prelate is also very critical of the positions taken by the Italian government. After backing Gaddafi and his regime for years, now Rome has decided to take part in the air strikes.

“If this is the government’s choice, it would be better for everyone that it resign,” the bishop said.

“How can anyone say that everything is normal and right? If the war continues, the gap between the Libyan and Italian peoples could get bigger, with unforeseeable consequences.”

====

Libya: Robin Hood And Robbers

http://print.dailymirror.lk/opinion1/42367.html

Daily Mirror (Sri Lanka)
April 29, 2011

Libya’s Robin Hood and the Robbers
Ameen Izzadeen

With every passing day, the Libyan picture becomes clearer. The emerging picture confirms what most people, including imperialists, know — that the reason for the military action against Libya is anything but humanitarian.

Protecting Libya’s civilians from Muammar Gaddafi’s forces is only a cover for a campaign aimed at regime change and the plunder of the resources not only of Libya but also of the whole of Africa.

According to a shocking article posted on OpEdNews.com, the Libyan war has its roots in oil and Lockerbie. The author, Susan Lindauer, a CIA ‘asset’ turned anti-war activist, says Libya was made a fall guy in the Lockerbie bombing that was carried out by the CIA’s drug mafia.

{For a compilation of the CIA’s drug operations, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_drug_trafficking.}

Lindauer claims that Gaddafi was the fall guy and he was forced to cough up about 2.7 billion dollars in compensation for the 270 victims who died when a bomb planted on Pan Am flight 103 exploded on December 21, 1988 over the Scottish town of Lockerbie. Gaddafi paid the money in 2008 after admitting to a crime which he had not committed to save his country from the pangs of gruelling UN sanctions.

When Gaddafi improved relations with the West in the wake of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, US oil companies wasted no time in striking deals. But they withdrew last year, complaining about the huge kickbacks Gaddafi was demanding.

Justifying the Libyan leader’s demand, Lindauer says, “Gaddafi took on the role of a modern-day Robin Hood, who insisted on replenishing his people for the costs they’d suffered under UN sanctions….You’ve got to admit that Gaddafi’s attempt to balance the scales of justice demonstrated a flair of righteous nationalism.”

She adds: “Don’t kid yourself. This is an oil war, and it smacks of imperialist double standards”.

{Visit http://www.opednews.com/articles/2/Libya-s-Blood-for-Oil-The-by-Susan-Lindauer-110327-21.html for Lindauer’s article.}

If oil is the reward that the US is seeking from the Libyan war, the enslavement of Africa is perhaps what France and Britain are after.

Though Gaddafi courted the West by dismantling Libya’s weapons of mass destruction programmes soon after the US invasion of Iraq, the Libyan leader had other ideas. He conceived a vision to free Africa from the West’s neocolonialist clutches.

In 1992, 45 African nations formed RASCOM (Regional African Satellite Communication Organisation) aimed at bringing down the cost of communications in the continent. Africa was paying some US$ 500 million a year as satellite fees to French and other European companies, and the call charges in the continent were the highest in the world. RASCOM had a plan to launch its own African satellite. The project would cost US$ 400 million. For 14 years, they went behind the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and other donors. These imperialist-run institutions made borrowing difficult by placing tough conditions.

Gaddafi put an end to these futile pleas and offered US$ 300 million. The African Development Bank with US$50 million and the West African Development Bank with US$27 million contributed to the project which was brought to fruition in December 2007. Africa’s gain was Europe’s loss. No wonder Gaddafi has become a villain for France, Britain and other imperialists though he is a hero for Africa.

Gaddafi had also pledged to fund three ambitious African projects — the creation of an African investment bank, an African monetary fund and an African central bank. Africa felt that these Africa-centred institutions were necessary to end its dependence on the IMF and the World Bank — institutions that prescribe unrealistic and unpopular measures to qualify for loans. These conditions which include measures to privatize natural resources and allowing unlimited access to foreign companies are designed to keep Africa eternally poor or dependant on the West. Libya had pledged funds for these projects from its investments in the United States. The US$ 30 billion which the Barack Obama administration froze (or robbed) at the first signs of the orchestrated troubles in the Libyan town of Benghazi was meant to finance these three African projects which would have given Africa some economic freedom.

Besides oil and Africa’s economic freedom, Libya’ refusal to join Africom, the United State’s African Command, is also a casus belli for the war on Libya. Though Africom’s stated objective is to assist African nations, critics say its military objective is to prevent China from gaining a strategic foothold in Africa. At present Africom operates from an old French base in Djibouti. Is the Libyan war aimed at bringing Africom to Libya? The one who controls Libya controls the Mediterranean, the Middle East and half of Africa. Since the end of World War II, the United States had a huge military base in Libya until Gaddafi in 1969 told the US to get out. Amidst uncertainty over the direction a civilian government in Egypt will take, a base in neighbouring Libya assumes added significance. Gaddafi opposed these moves and played a dangerous game with the West — offering them oil deals while taking steps to check the West’s influence on Africa and the Middle East.

In one such anti-West tirade in 2003, Gaddafi at an Arab summit slammed Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah who was seated opposite him. “You are a product of Britain and protected by the US.”

Six year later, he repeated the accusations at another summit, saying “After six years, it has been proven that with…the grave before you, it is Britain that made you and the Americans that protected you.”

No wonder that Saudi Arabia and other pro-US Gulf states have joined the military campaign against Libya — something they would not even dream of doing to protect the Palestinian people from Israel.

====

Several Injured, Perhaps Dead In NATO Air Strike On Libyan Capital

http://english.cri.cn/6966/2011/04/28/2741s634609.htm

Xinhua News Agency
April 28, 2011

At Least 4 Injured in NATO Airstrikes on Tripoli

At least four people were injured in NATO airstrikes on Libyan capital Tripoli early Thursday morning, which had struck a military target in the eastern part of the city, a Xinhua reporter said.

At least four people were pulled out from the explosion sites and sent to hospital, but it was unclear whether they were fatally wounded, said the reporter, adding that more casualties are possible.

NATO airplanes fired four rockets on Tripoli in the latest raid, hitting a military academy. An administrative building of the academy and a government-owned warehouse was destroyed.

Large plumes of smoke could be seen above the areas struck by the rockets, said the reporter whose home is just 2 km away from one of the explosion sites.

====

Libya To Take Legal Action Against NATO Over Gaddafi Assassination Attempt

http://www.afriquejet.com/news/africa-news/libya-takes-legal-action-against-nato-for-attempt-on-kadhafi’s-life-2011042810243.html

Afrique en ligne/Pan-African News Agency
April 28, 2011

Libya takes legal action against NATO for attempt on Kadhafi’s life

Tripoli, Libya: Libya has undertaken legal proceedings before the ‘competent courts’ against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and its allies for attempting to assassinate the country’s leader, Mouammar Kadhafi, an official source said here Wednesday.

On Sunday, Kadhafi’s office, located in his residence at Bab Al-Aziziya in Tripoli, was totally destroyed by the air strikes launched by NATO. Legal services at the Libyan General People’s Committee said Wednesday that ‘NATO, on 25 April, bombarded the administrative building at Bab Al-Aziziya, used for administrative purposes and this was in an attempt to assassinate Kadhafi,’ the Libyan News Agency (JANA) said.

The Libyan judicial services said ‘with regard to the violation of the international law, which this criminal act represents, the absence of all basis on international legality, as well as its violation of the content of the 1970 and 1973 UN Security Council resolutions, the legal competent services at the Libyan General People’s Committee for Justice have undertaken actions for a complaint before the specialized courts against NATO and those responsible for those acts.’

====

NATO’s Month-Long Air War: 4,100 Sorties, 1,700 Strike Missions

http://www.nato.int/nato_static/assets/pdf/pdf_2011_04/20110428_110428-oup-update.pdf

North Atlantic Treaty Organization
April 28, 2011

NATO and Libya
JFC Naples, SHAPE, NATO HQ

….

Air Operations

Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 08.00GMT) a total of 4,100 sorties of which 1,699 strike sorties have been conducted.

Sorties conducted 27 April: 119

Strike sorties conducted 27 April: 41

….

Key Targets and Engagements

27 April: in the vicinity of Tripoli: 1 Communications facility; 2 vehicle storage buildings; 1 surface-to-air missile storage facility.

In the vicinity of Misurata: 2 rocket launchers; 2 artillery vehicles; 1 armoured personnel carrier.

In the vicinity of Mizdah: 7 ammunition storage bunkers.

In the vicinity of Sirte: 12 ammunition storage bunkers.

….

Arms Embargo Activities

A total of 19 ships under NATO command are actively patrolling the Central Mediterranean.

20 Vessels were hailed on 27 April to determine destination and cargo. 2 boardings (no diversion) were conducted.

A total of 682 vessels have been hailed, 20 boardings and 5 diversions have been conducted since the beginning of arms embargo operations.

….

====

Russia Says EU, NATO Ready To Start Ground Operation In Libya

http://rt.com/politics/nato-ready-ground-libya/

RT
April 28, 2011

Russia says EU, NATO ready to start ground operation in Libya

Russia’s envoy to NATO says that the European Union is ready to send up to 1,500 soldiers to conduct a ground operation in Libya, albeit this will be called support of the humanitarian mission.

­Dmitry Rogozin told Russian news agencies on Thursday that the European Union had prepared an operation to enforce the security of the humanitarian mission and at present there were only some logistical details to be fixed. Rogozin said that the EU will send about 1,500 people divided into tactical groups and according to his information these will be soldiers from Germany and the Netherlands.

The EU Council made the decision to start preparations for the humanitarian operation on April 1, but in order to turn the operation into the practical phase the union needs a request from the United Nations which has not yet been received.

NATO was also considering ground operations in Libya despite the fact that the UN resolution on the situation in the country only allows an air blockade. At present, NATO is sending a civilian representative to the city of Benghazi to establish ties with the Libyan opposition forces. The Russian envoy said that such a move can be explained by ambitions more than practical reasons.

“Sending the NATO civilian mission to Benghazi fully matches the ambitions stated in the alliance’s new strategic concept that reads that from now on NATO will be holding all-in-one operations without using any services from the European Union or other international organizations. NATO wants to show now that it is able to conduct universal work. Be a universal soldier, a nurse and a babysitter all in one,” Rogozin said.

Dmitry Rogozin earlier warned that the international coalition could use the humanitarian operation as a disguise for a large-scale ground operation against Muammar Gaddafi’s troops.

Russian news agency Itar-Tass reported earlier on Thursday that a diplomatic source had confirmed that NATO was sending a civilian representative with a small staff of aides to Benghazi in order to secure political contacts with the National Transitional Council….

====

West Plans Libyan Invasion Under Humanitarian Guise

http://rt.com/politics/press/nezavisimaya/gaddafi-ground-un-operation/en/

Nezavisimaya/RT
April 28, 2011

Gaddafi asks Russia to be his counsel
Coalition members are planning a ground “humanitarian” operation
Olesya Khantsevich

The Western coalition is looking for ways to initiate a ground operation in Libya, which would not violate the current UN resolution and not trigger the adoption of a new one.

The EU’s secret plan for a ground operation became available to the press.

Meanwhile, the humanitarian situation in the combat zone is deteriorating day by day. While the West continues strikes and its aerial hunt for Gaddafi, the rebels are receiving significant financial support from abroad – the US, Australia, and Kuwait. The Libyan authorities have asked Russia to initiate an emergency UN Security Council meeting in order to stop “the excessive aggression of the colonialists and Crusaders”.

The German newspaper Bild had published the EU’s secret plan for a ground operation in Libya. Despite the fact that the mission is officially called humanitarian, the 60-page document provides for the involvement of soldiers, sappers, air traffic controllers, and special military machinery. The headquarters of the mission are expected to be located in Rome, the term of operation – no more than four months. The military campaign, named EUFOR Libya, could start after the EU receives an appropriate request from the UN. A source in the EU has confirmed this information, while a representative of NATO headquarters in Brussels said that plans for this type of a ground operation are also nurtured by the alliance.

Despite the fact that the Western collation leaders continue to assert that a ground invasion is not in their plans, the leadership of the NATO countries is considering the option of bypassing the UN resolution of March 17 – this conclusion is being drawn by the media.

On Tuesday, French President Nicolas Sarkozy had excluded the possibility of launching a ground operation, underscoring that it would violate the UN Security Council resolution, but at the same time he left room for the possibility of sending reconnaissance units and military experts, which according to him is not prohibited by the resolution.

Earlier, French authorities had spoken in favor of aiming NATO bombers from the ground; otherwise, they “blindly” deliver strikes, which leads to fatal mistakes.

And British Prime Minister David Cameron had accepted the possibility of supplying arms to the Libyan rebels. “We do not exclude the possibility of delivering arms supplies, but we have yet to make a decision on this issue. The legal and practical issues must be carefully examined,” he said. Meanwhile, UK Foreign Secretary, William Hague, expressed the opinion that the arms embargo is not obsolete. “In certain circumstances, it is legal under the UN resolution to supply equipment to protect civilian lives,” said the foreign secretary. The media had repeatedly reported that special ground units from Great Britain, France, and Italy are secretly operating in Libya.

Meanwhile, despite the all-round assistance, the opposition is unable to overturn Muammar Gaddafi. His loyal army continues to strike against Misurata.

A month and a half after the Western coalition launched the airborne mission, the bloodshed continues.

Residents of east Libya, which is under the control of Gaddafi’s opposition, could face food shortages. Meanwhile, the financial support of the rebels rises day by day – US President Barack Obama has instructed to allocate $25 million, Australia donated ten time less for humanitarian relief, and Kuwait provided $180 million to the rebels.

Moreover, the US Treasury had allowed American companies to buy oil from the Libyan rebels. The Libyan leader, meanwhile, was not discouraged after the bombing of his residence in Tripoli. He is actively seeking support from abroad. Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez, said that a delegation from Libya had arrived to his country “in search for a political solution”. He called Gaddafi a friend and condemned the “military intervention” of the US and members of the EU. “They are dropping bombs on military barracks, schools, shopping centers….Who gave them this right? We are searching for a peaceful solution to the situation,” said Chavez.

Libyan authorities have also turned to Russia, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, urging it to convene an emergency meeting. In the appeal it is stated that the topic of discussion at the meeting needs to be “the excessive aggression of the colonizers and Crusaders, who are striking civilian targets and trying to liquidate Muammar Gaddafi, which violates the UN Security Council resolutions and the principles of international law”.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has not yet decided to initiate an emergency meeting; but recently, Russia has been acting as Libya’s chief defender in the international arena.

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin recently confronted NATO by telling journalists in Copenhagen that “Libyans need to be allowed to resolve the situation themselves”.

He recalled the UN Security Council resolution authorizing a no-fly zone over Libya. “Where is there a no-fly zone, if the palaces, where Gaddafi resides, are bombarded from the sky on a daily basis? They say: no we don’t want to destroy him. Then why strike the palaces? What are they trying to do there, get rid of mice?” said the head of the government.

Earlier, Russia’s Foreign Affairs Minister, Sergey Lavrov, said that Russia will use its veto right and will not support a new UN Security Council resolution on Libya “if it, one way or another, leads to further exacerbation of the civil war, including by outside intervention”.

====

Libya Trains Volunteer Army To Fight Against NATO Invasion

http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE73Q8ZZ20110427

Reuters
April 27, 2011

Libya’s Gaddafi trains volunteer army to fight NATO
By Lin Noueihed

TARHUNAH, LibyaL The man squats down and fires. A rocket-propelled grenade shoots into the desert to calls of “Allahu Akbar,” God is Greatest. Another man takes his place.

These are members of the volunteer army being trained by Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in the name of fighting any NATO ground invasion.

Libyan officials have said in recent weeks that they had begun arming and training civilians across government-controlled western Libya, in an effort to put the country’s tribes at the forefront of the fight against NATO attacks.

In a government-organised trip on Wednesday, journalists were taken to Tarhunah, 85 km (53 miles) southeast of Tripoli, to meet the volunteers who are being armed and trained there.
….
“We have trained 400 people so far and given them arms. We started with the NATO strikes,” said Jamal Ibrahim Abu Ghrara, an agricultural engineer and head of the local people’s committee who was supervising the training.

Another 14 committees have also trained volunteers to fight what they see as a possible NATO invasion.
….
Sitting on the grass, cradling his Kalashnikov rifle, 22-year-old Mohammed Jumaa, said he volunteered with his two brothers and two sisters, to protect their family in any war.

“We are all volunteers. Even the girls,” Jumaa said softly.

“We’re not expecting a rebellion here or the rebels to reach here. It is about NATO. They are planning to come by land and they want to come here and take our oil.”
….

====

Bishop Denounces NATO Bombing Campaign In Libya

http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=10141

Catholic Culture
April 28, 2011

Bishop denounces continued bombing campaign in Libya

The apostolic vicar of Tripoli has renewed his condemnation of the bombing of Libya by NATO forces.

“On Easter Monday, we witnessed a terrible bombing in Tripoli, but this did not stop the faithful from being present in church,” Bishop Giovanni Martinelli told the Fides news agency. “The United Nations has decided to make war and does not allow any form of dialogue as a means of resolving disputes. Everyone wants to continue to pursue the solution of the bombs. It is sad, terrible, because nothing will change. It is a defeat for humanity.”

====

War Against Libya As Seen From Caribbean, Latin America

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/commentaries/Caricom_s_watch_on_Libya-120756154.html

Trinindad Express
April 27, 2011

Caricom’s watch on Libya
By Rickey Singh

Caribbean Community governments whose economic development programmes are linked to some vital funding from Libya, are in deep agony as the powerful and wealthy western nations now intensify their military battle for “regime change” in Tripoli with direct bombing strikes on the office complex of President Moammar Gadaffi.

Among Caribbean leaders expressing concerns are Caricom’s current chairman, Prime Minister Tillman Thomas of Grenada and counterparts in St Vincent and the Grenadines (Ralph Gonzales); Antigua and Barbuda (Baldwin Spencer); Dominica (Roosevelt Skerrit); St Lucia (Stephenson King) and St Kitts and Nevis (Denzil Douglas).

As the Guardian (UK) was reporting on Easter Monday’s official Libyan complaint that two successive bombing strikes were part of a plan to assassinate Gadaffi, the Caribbean Media Corporation (CMC) was pointing to the consequences for some regional economies in view of the deteriorating situation in Libya.

Immediate projects expected to be affected include the opening of a Libyan embassy in St Lucia and a bank in St Kitts. As Prime Minister Spencer contends, “whether we like it or not, we are still very much dependent on oil from the Middle East and most of our economies are driven by that…and we are nervously watching developments in the North African country of Libya….”

Prime Minister Spencer and a lot of other Caribbean leaders — if not all of them — would also be conscious of another reality beyond our dependency on oil.

It is the reality that the western nations currently driving the campaign for regime change in Libya — namely the US, Britain and France — and distorting in the process last month’s UN Security Council’s “no fly zone” resolution to “protect civilians” — do not give a damn as to what the governments and people of the Latin American and Caribbean region think about how they wage their campaign to get Gadaffi out of power.

In the March 23 column on an “Arab ‘fig leaf’ for regime change” in Libya, I made clear that as a journalist of this region, I have no tears to shed for Gadaffi who has been ruling Libya with an iron first for some four decades.

Further, it was evident that the support sought from the Arab League by the US and its allies for the UN Security Council’s “no-fly zone” resolution could not mask the real objective of “regime change” in Tripoli.

Since then, the spreading turmoil in that region, with thousands dead and injured and widespread destruction in Libya, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere, have served to confirm the real objective of the UN ‘no-fly zone’ resolution — getting rid of Gadaffi, by all means necessary..

In contrast to the double-speak on the bloody battles in that region, the US and its two most formidable “partners in war” on Libya — Britain and France — have been demonstrating that “regime change” in Tripoli is the name of the game — as was done in Baghdad to get rid of Saddam Hussein. Then it was done with open contempt for the UN when then-President George Bush ignored the world body in launching the US military invasion of Iraq.

The people and governments of the Caribbean are mere spectators — like people and governments in other poor and developing regions of the world — to the hypocrisy of the US and its major European allies as they expediently engage in muted criticisms against the brutal repression of western-backed regimes in the Middle East but are pressing for regime change in Libya. Even if, as of now, it means taking taking out the Libyan dictator dead.

It should be recalled that back in 1986 President Ronald Reagan had authorised the bombing of Libya — with US jets flying from British bases — and including the residential compound. There were more than 100 civilian deaths, among them Gadaffi adopted baby daughter, Hannah.

In Libya, unlike elsewhere in that region, the US and its NATO allies are actually involved in warfare on behalf of armed rebels committed to the goal of ending the Gadaffi regime. Not satisfied with the gains of Gadaffi’s political opponents, they are no longer pretending about simply restricting themselves to the original intent of the UN Security Council resolution on “protecting” civilians.

Under enormous pressure from the Obama administration, the UN had refused Libya’s request for a hearing of its position in the current conflict. The UN had made no prior effort to seriously broker negotiations between Gadaffi’s government and the coalition of rebel forces.

While Caricom ponders the usefulness of at least issuing a collective “statement of concern” about the politics of regime change in Libya, the government in Tripoli has denounced what it regards “as an attempt to assassinate the (Libyan) leader and unifying the figure of our country….”

Do not expect America and its NATO allies to give any credence to Gadaffi’s claim that the war currently being waged against Libya reveals a violation of the letter and spirit of the UN Security Council resolution authorising military intervention “to protect civilians”

One does not, however, have to be a political sympathiser of the Libyan leader to make an independent judgment on what’s occurring at present in Libya — in the name of “democracy”.

====

Russia, China Oppose Foreign Interference In Syria

http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/04/28/49589323.html

Voice of Russia
April 28, 2011

Russia warns against interference in Syria
Konstantin Garibov

-It is becoming increasingly obvious that some people in Syria and other countries hope that the deteriorating situation will compel the international community to interfere under the pretext of assistance and side with one of the parties involved, like it happened in Libya. This is a provocation of violence and a sort of invitation to a civil war….

Members of the UN Security Council have failed to agree upon a statement condemning the Syrian government’s violence against the opposition.

Great Britain, France, Germany and Portugal suggested that the UN condemn Damascus for its disproportionate use of force against the peaceful population and urged an independent enquiry into all the related facts.

Responding to this proposal, UN Envoy in Syria Bashar Ja’afari said that Damascus has nothing to hide and is ready to carry out its own investigation. The Syrian army’s military operations are not targeted against the peaceful population but aim to do away with extremist terrorist groups, the official stressed.

Russia, China and Lebanon, which is the only Arab country in the UN Security Council, have taken a stand against the draft statement. Russian deputy UN Ambassador Alexander Pankin urged members not to ignore the fact that Syrian violence “does not all originate from one side.” He referred to the killing of a military convoy by anti-government forces, armed assaults on military facilities and checkpoints, as well as murders of police officers. The Russian diplomat does not however consider the conflict in Syria a threat to international security.

There was another reason behind Russia’s refusal to back the draft statement. It is becoming increasingly obvious that some people in Syria and other countries hope that the deteriorating situation will compel the international community to interfere under the pretext of assistance and side with one of the parties involved, like it happened in Libya. This is a provocation of violence and a sort of invitation to a civil war, deputy director of the Institute for US and Canada Studies Pavel Zolotarev said.

“Any outside interference in the settlement of Syria’s domestic issues is exceedingly dangerous in this context. Every country has some internal opposition forces capable of provoking chaos, presuming that other countries, interested in Syrian instability or the ascent to power of people who will pursue a policy beneficial to them, will start supporting these forces. This is not the way to ensure peace and stability. We will definitely trigger chaos if we follow this track. Therefore, Russia’s stand on Syria is clearly based on the principles of international law and common sense,” Pavel Zolotarev emphasized.
….
On Thursday, April 28th, the UN Security Council is going to discuss the situation in Libya. No draft resolution has been prepared as yet. Russia will not endorse any new resolution unless it contains an appeal to cease violence, bloodshed and military operations, as well as to immediately sit down at the negotiating table and finally agree on the Libyan future, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the day before. But if the resolution leads to further exacerbation of the civil war, including outside interference, Russia will find it completely impossible to uphold it.

====

Libya: Africa And Politics of Contradictions

http://allafrica.com/stories/201104280016.html

The Herald (Zimbabwe)
April 27, 2011

Africa And Politics of Contradictions
Reason Wafawarova

-It is people without love who talk about love most often. It is people without grassroots participation in the decision-making process of their own countries who preach about democracy the most. It is people with atomic bombs and earth-shattering nuclear weapons who preach loudest about international peace.
It is people with lethal bombs and sophisticated military aircraft who preach most about the protection of Libyan civilians while spraying Libyan cities with deadly bombs….
-In fact, imperialism maintains itself largely on the effect of the apathy and hopelessness of its victims. It is purely the apathy and ignorance of Africans that is maintaining the Western aggression in Libya today.
It is quite unthinkable that a coalition of the willing from Africa could decide to go and bomb a European country, banking on the apathy and ignorance of Europeans.
As Libya is burning, Africa is busy fearing who could be next and our own people are heard bragging that Zimbabwe could be next, Uganda is next, Ethiopia is next and so on.
-What is discussed in white written slave history is the nature and condition of slavery, not the nature and condition of the slave master….And today we are made to discuss the nature and condition of democracy and human rights, not the nature and condition of the democratisation masters pushing all nationalities into compliance with the West’s dictates.

There is an unexplained wonder of political history where the people with a track record of going to war, who are ready to go to war, and have gone to war and destroyed millions of lives, are the most vocal in talking about peace, human rights and the protection of civilians from military attacks.

The United States, France and the UK have a terrible history of murderous slavery, cruel colonisation of other peoples, and despicable modern-day imperialistic tendencies.

This history is indelible and cannot be denied or wished away.

But Amos Wilson noted: “If accepting the truth about the situation of African peoples and other people in the world today means exposing the European to himself, of course he is going to ignore that expose.”

When writers expose the real motives of Westerners for the unjust war they are currently launching on Libya, what Western powers can only do is ignore that expose, while pushing a propaganda line that says the war is about protecting Libyans from their monstrous leadership.

It is people without love who talk about love most often. It is people without grassroots participation in the decision-making process of their own countries who preach about democracy the most. It is people with atomic bombs and earth-shattering nuclear weapons who preach loudest about international peace.

It is people with lethal bombs and sophisticated military aircraft who preach most about the protection of Libyan civilians while spraying Libyan cities with deadly bombs – of course in the name of benefitting the very civilians whose lives and infrastructure they are destroying.

What we must always recognise is that Africans do have a huge stake in ensuring the continuation of the failure of large segments of our own population, and Libya is no exception.

There are numerous contradictions in African society and these are issues of great importance in determining the problems bedevilling the continent.

Many of our people have an amazing excuse that says the circumstances determining our lives today are beyond our control. So there is a belief that other people are totally responsible for the state of Africa today and therefore we have neither say in nor control over these issues.

There is an extent to which this might be true when one looks at colonial history and what slavery did to the people of Africa. But when post-colonial influences end up creating psychological problems for the African individual it becomes time for self-reflection.

One has to see the apathy Africa is expressing over the military aggression in Libya today. The African leadership is apathetic if and when not complicit. They have given up and most have resigned from the African life, leaving the fate of their countries to the dictates of Western aid and to the will of Western political elites and their NGO arms.

When a president of a country becomes a victim of psychological problems to the extent of giving up effort and acknowledging that Africa is powerless and cannot do without handholding from Westerners, then we have to be alive to the reality that our hope as a continent is right in the abyss.

It is the apathy and resignation on the part of our African leadership that helps a great deal in maintaining the post-colonial imperial system that subjugates Africa today.

There is a fear of uniting and trusting each other, the inexplicable fear of coming together and solving our problems together. This explains a lot the great deal of political polarisation within our body politic.

Political parties in Africa are like armies going to war against each other, as opposed to mental bodies competing in the battle of ideas. We threaten our political rivals with sloganeering, violence, financial muscle, and the eventuality is often intolerance and armed confrontation.

It is probably only in Africa where singing, shouting, dancing, eating and drinking are integral components of structuring a successful political party.

Not only are we convinced that it is just not in us to unite and solve our problems together as a people, but many of us are so much awed by the might of white imperialism that there is this belief that the dominance of imperial powers is in itself indomitable.

In fact, imperialism maintains itself largely on the effect of the apathy and hopelessness of its victims. It is purely the apathy and ignorance of Africans that is maintaining the Western aggression in Libya today.

It is quite unthinkable that a coalition of the willing from Africa could decide to go and bomb a European country, banking on the apathy and ignorance of Europeans.

As Libya is burning, Africa is busy fearing who could be next and our own people are heard bragging that Zimbabwe could be next, Uganda is next, Ethiopia is next and so on.

Cheering the monster in the house is quite understandable when it is coming from individuals with psychological problems emanating from the effects of slavery and colonisation. It is a socially constructed mental disorder.

We are witnessing a period when a section of our people is drowned in the fear of the white man, resigned from life and hope, incapable of self-initiative, and absolutely mesmerised by the glitter of Western civilisation.

There are those among us who try to deal with the discrepancy between what the imperial system dictates Africa can achieve, and our failure to achieve even that.

One easy way out has always been the lowering of the African aspiration, fitting the African story into a lesser place that will not tamper with Western interests within our own continent.

So, South Africa battles to lower the aspiration of blacks in repossessing their colonially stolen lands; to lower the aspiration of the black person in having control over the mineral resources of that country, and to lower the aspiration of the African to become an employer and not an employee, as is defined by colonial tradition.

The moment Julius Malema talks land redistribution or nationalisation of mines, there are always those among us who are quick to remind the rest of Africa that such aspirations must be lowered so that white investors are not scared. The irony of protecting one’s own chains is exactly what perpetuated slavery and colonialism.

And, Africa is openly threatened that the West will do a Zimbabwe on anyone that dares threaten post-colonial imperial economic interests on the continent. Of course Zimbabwe embarked on an ambitious land redistribution programme that resulted in the strangulation of its economy through a murderous sanctions regime illegally imposed by the US, the EU and other Western outposts.

Then there are other African leaders who try to inflate their achievements, to inflate their personalities. They gloat and brag about economic growth that is based on over 70 percent Western donor aid. They gloat about rising to political power as puppets funded and directed by Western elites. They look around pompously as they showcase what they describe as “our friends from the international community”.

We see the average African middle class citizen being very boastful, being so egocentric, bragging a great deal about personal achievements, pumping themselves up, and pumping even smallest of achievements up into gigantic exploits.

This is just a measure of the destruction that has occurred to the self-esteem of the African – the effect of colonial hegemony over the African life. A family car is to an average African middle class citizen what Virgin is to Richard Branson.
….
[T]hose who tell us about Libya cannot be expected to condemn themselves. But it really needs no explanation to figure out that the invasion of a sovereign state for the sake of removing its political leadership is illegal and unacceptable.

So what is discussed in the media today is the nature and conditions of the politics of Libya, not the nature and condition of the invading Western forces.

What is discussed in white written slave history is the nature and condition of slavery, not the nature and condition of the slave master.

The same goes for colonialism. White written colonialism discusses the nature and condition of colonialism itself, not the nature and condition of the colonial master.

And today we are made to discuss the nature and condition of democracy and human rights, not the nature and condition of the democratisation masters pushing all nationalities into compliance with the West’s dictates.

The questions dealt with in the history that shapes our lives today are not questions about the mental stability and characteristics of those who enslaved and colonised us, those who continue to dominate us today, and we never get to ask if these same people should continue to be influential over our lives.

This is why some among us believe that the same people are fighting on behalf of Libyan civilians today – even by bombing the same civilians in whose name they fly their murderous planes over Libyan air space, of course with the full blessing of Ban Ki-moon’s United Nations.

We have been made to see an imaginary genocide “averted” by real Western firepower and the world is being coerced to imagine that Gaddafi was about to commit genocide in Benghazi just before the messianic West came with the love and mercy of the Archangel Michael.

Africa we are one and together we will overcome. It is homeland or death!

====

About these ads