Updates on Libyan war/Stop NATO news: August 27, 2011
====
NATO Bombs Tripoli, Sirte; Marauding Mobs Ransack Libyan Capital
Libya: 20,518 NATO Air Sorties, 7,732 Combat Missions
Libya Falls Victim To NATO, Mailed Fist Of 21st Century Neo-Imperialism
Libya: NATO Proxies On Murderous Racist Rampage
CNN: Hundreds Of Pro-Al-Qaeda Extremists Released From Tripoli Jail
NATO Special Forces Pave Way For Al-Qaeda, Somalia/Iraq-Type Black Hole
Sanitized Slaughter: NATO Wages War But Avoids The Word
Reintegrated Into NATO, Frances Takes On Ivory Coast, Libya…Syria
Lesson Of Libyan War: Completely Capitulate As Soon As Possible Or Develop Sophisticated Weapons
Pentagon’s Horn Of Africa Task Force Hosts 11-Nation Gathering
Britain Boosts Military Ties With Azerbaijan Versus Armenia, Iran
Canada Expands Military Role In Arctic For Local, Global Missions
NATO Rejects Presidential Election In Abkhazia
====
NATO Bombs Tripoli, Sirte; Marauding Mobs Ransack Libyan Capital
http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/08/27/55259117.html
Voice of Russia
August 27, 2011
NATO planes bomb Tripoli, Sirte
In Libya British warplanes have struck a large bunker in Muammar Gaddafi’s hometown of Sirte, and US aircraft keep swooping on Gaddafi-loyalists in the capital Tripoli as NATO focuses on loyalist forces trying to hold back advancing rebels.
Meanwhile marauding mobs are on a rampage in Tripoli ransacking foreign embassies and government offices and even the state museum.
Tensions remain high on the Tunisian border where the opposition forces, backed by British and French commandos, on Friday overran the major Ras-Djdir checkpoint…
====
Libya: 20,518 NATO Air Sorties, 7,732 Combat Missions
http://www.nato.int/nato_static/assets/pdf/pdf_2011_08/20110827_110827-oup-update.pdf
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
August 27, 2011
NATO and Libya
Allied Joint Force Command NAPLES, SHAPE, NATO HQ
…
Over the past 24 hours, NATO has conducted the following activities associated with Operation UNIFIED PROTECTOR:
Air Operations
Since the beginning of the NATO operation (31 March 2011, 06.00GMT) a total of 20,518 sorties, including 7,732 strike sorties,have been conducted.
Sorties conducted 26 AUGUST: 123
Strike sorties conducted 26 AUGUST: 42
…
====
Libya Falls Victim To NATO, Mailed Fist Of 21st Century Neo-Imperialism
http://thecitizen.co.tz/business/14-international-business/14147–libyas-forced-collapse-what-does-it-portend-for-africa.html
The Citizen (Tanzania)
August 27, 2011
Libya’s forced collapse: What does it portend for Africa?
By Amengeo Amengeo
-The coup was underway. The “rebels,” a motley band of weekend thugs were no match for the Libyan army which legally was bound to defend itself against armed insurrection, so Nato [the new mailed fist of 21st century neo-imperialism] unleashed its aerial might, special forces [French Foreign Legion commandos, SAS and US SEALS] against the legitimate government of Libya. It was inevitable that sooner or later this lopsided military power would take its toll as Nato bombed Tripoli and other parts of Libya on a daily basis.
-What happens in Libya is a harbinger of what the West has in store for Africa. True independence and African unity will not be tolerated. Africa is too rich in resources that the world needs to be allowed to control its own destiny. This war is not just about Gaddafi. It is an opening salvo in a war to reclaim the continent for foreign interests, just as it was in 1896 in the Scramble for Africa…[T]he West will set up permanent military bases to control the Mediterranean Sea and a bridgehead for the re-conquest of Africa will have been established.
By the time this article is published, the sovereign government of Libya would have been overthrown in a blatant Western armed, sponsored and supported coup by the striking arm of the new imperialism – Nato [North Atlantic Treaty Organization.]
Some six months ago, the French and British governments frantically sponsored a United Nations resolution to “protect the civilians of Libya from their own government.”
Never mind that this sovereign government was facing an armed revolt by a dissident region of the country; never mind that these “rebels” had no legitimacy whatsoever; never mind that the so-called “democratic protesters” were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of black Africans in xenophobic racist pogroms in the year 2000.
None of this mattered. What mattered was that in the turmoil of the so-called “Arab Spring” a heaven-sent opportunity presented itself to the West to get rid of a political thorn in its side, one that was leading the African Continent dangerously close to realizing a greater deal of autonomy than had been afforded under the pretence of Western “aid,” economic advice and structural development.
Gaddafi, his personal flamboyance notwithstanding, has consistently sought to involve his country in unity with first the Arabs and then the Africans. When Gaddafi proposed pan-Arab unity, he was scoffed at, ridiculed as an ambitious madman and insulted and ignored by the Arabs. He finally and sensibly gave up and turned his eyes to Africa, believing that Africa held out more hope for unity.
While under sanctions by the West, the Africans unswervingly supported Gaddafi. Neslon Mandela upon his release from apartheid’s prisons defied Western sanctions and went overland to visit and thank Colonel Gaddafi for his moral and financial support during the long struggle against apartheid. Other African leaders followed and regular visits with Gaddafi made the sanctions totally irrelevant.
After the Iraqi war of aggression by the Bush administration broke out, Gaddafi cut a deal with the West, relinquishing his weapons programs, which included nuclear weapons, for re-inclusion in the global economic system. Still Gaddafi sought to develop African unity and to this end relieved Africa of the burden of paying for satellite usage $500 million annually to Europe.
At his encouragement Africa bought its own satellites and now the continent communicates without relying on Europe. Gaddafi also proposed a single African currency backed by gold which would have sounded the death-knell for the CFA and removed much of France’s influence and power in Africa.
An African Monetary Fund was also in the works, which would have further set Africa on the road to true economic and political independence. Then there was the Libyan leader’s mooting of a million-man African army. This was the red line where the West decided to checkmate Libya.
Events surrounding the so-called “Arab Spring” seemed tailor-made for Western plans. Overnight, armed groups showed up in Benghazi and an organized pattern emerged for the overthrow of Gaddafi. First there was the “concern” for civilian life, always a good tear-jerker.., then the French and British stepped in, forcing a UN Security Council vote.
Despite senior officials in the US administration dismissing Libya’s strategic importance to US interests, the Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, pushed her hawkish agenda and dragged the US president on board for this war of blatant aggression.
The coup was underway. The “rebels,” a motley band of weekend thugs were no match for the Libyan army which legally was bound to defend itself against armed insurrection, so Nato [the new mailed fist of 21st century neo-imperialism] unleashed its aerial might, special forces [French Foreign Legion commandos, SAS and US SEALS] against the legitimate government of Libya. It was inevitable that sooner or later this lopsided military power would take its toll as Nato bombed Tripoli and other parts of Libya on a daily basis.
When this conflict was forced on the Libyan people, the African Union insisted that there must not be any military intervention, but was soon sidelined and completely ignored by the coup-makers and a compliant Western press. While a sovereign nation, a member of the AU was being attacked, African efforts to find a mediated solution were completely ignored and ridiculed.
The leaders of Africa who should have denounced with one voice the aggression against an African country cravenly acquiesced with the Nato war, making lame token protests.
What happens in Libya is a harbinger of what the West has in store for Africa. True independence and African unity will not be tolerated. Africa is too rich in resources that the world needs to be allowed to control its own destiny. This war is not just about Gaddafi. It is an opening salvo in a war to reclaim the continent for foreign interests, just as it was in 1896 in the Scramble for Africa.
African leaders lack faith in their own abilities and in the power of their people. Libya could have been saved, had Africans united and spoken resoundingly to the world, voicing their opposition to this war of aggression. The AU could have called for the expulsion of diplomats from the Nato countries taking part in the war, they could have urged their citizens into the streets to demonstrate for “hands off Libya.” The oil-producing countries could have slowed down their oil taps, driving up the price of gasoline, they could have protested more loudly.
The same forces which broke Sudan in half are continuing the process of fragmenting Africa into even more manageable, weaker pieces. What will happen after Gaddafi is overthrown? All progressive programmes that he had initiated will be dismantled and the idea of Africa unity repudiated as the dreams of madman.
Foreign economic interests will come in to carve up the pie, instability will take root as in Iraq under the guise of multi-party democracy [which should be anathema to Africans since it has brought more chaos than comfort in its wake] the West will set up permanent military bases to control the Mediterranean Sea and a bridgehead for the re-conquest of Africa will have been established.
This is no fantasy. The West is not prepared to relinquish its hegemony and go quietly into the night. The neo-colonializing of Africa had begun immediately after ‘independence’ with aid programs that created dependencies, French military bases that never closed, structural adjustments, missionaries dividing and spiritually confusing the people, dumping of toxic waste and the signing and enforcement of economic agreements that were never in the interests of the African peoples.
Many African leaders for selfish, mostly pecuniary, reasons collaborated with this plunder of Africa, ignoring the will of its peoples. Gaddafi’s removal from power should not be anything to celebrate for Africans, but to mourn, for we are being thrown back into eras when we were truly without freedom. As this neo-imperialism and neo-colonialism intensifies, it would be ironic if twenty years from now Africans would have to fight all over again the bitter revolutionary wars that ostensibly brought them freedom.
The author is a specialist in Spanish, Latin American, Caribbean as well as African history.
====
Libya: NATO Proxies On Murderous Racist Rampage
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/rebels-settle-scores-in-libyan-capital-2344671.html
The Independent
August 27, 2011
UN urges restraint as the rebels wreak their revenge on ‘loyalists’
By Kim Sengupta in Tripoli
The killings were pitiless
[Excerpts]
They had taken place at a makeshift hospital, in a tent marked clearly with the symbols of the Islamic Crescent. Some of the dead were on stretchers, attached to intravenous drips. Some were on the back of an ambulance that had been shot at. A few were on the ground, seemingly attempting to crawl to safety when the bullets came.
Around 30 men lay decomposing in the heat. Many of them had their hands tied behind their back, either with plastic handcuffs or ropes. One had a scarf stuffed into his mouth. Almost all of the victims were black men. Their bodies had been dumped near the scene of two of the fierce battles between rebel and regime forces in Tripoli.
“Come and see. These are blacks, Africans, hired by Gaddafi, mercenaries,” shouted Ahmed Bin Sabri, lifting the tent flap to show the body of one dead patient, his grey T-shirt stained dark red with blood, the saline pipe running into his arm black with flies. Why had an injured man receiving treatment been executed? Mr Sabri, more a camp follower than a fighter, shrugged. It was seemingly incomprehensible to him that anything wrong had been done.
The corpses were on the grass verges of two large roundabouts between Bab al-Aziziyah, Muammar Gaddafi’s compound stormed by the revolutionaries [sic] at the weekend and Abu Salim, a loyalist district which saw three days of ferocious violence.
The United Nations issued an urgent call for restraint by both sides in the bloody and bitter endgame to the civil war yesterday. But the thirst for vengeance has been difficult to control, to which the morgues, hospitals and the urban killings fields of the Libyan capital bore testimony.
…
The atrocities have apparently not been confined to Tripoli: Amnesty International has reported similar violence in the coastal town of Zawiyah, much of it against men from sub-Saharan Africa who, it has been claimed, were migrant workers.
…
====
CNN: Hundreds Of Pro-Al-Qaeda Extremists Released From Tripoli Jail
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/08/26/libya.militants.analysis/
CNN
August 26, 2011
Islamic militants among prisoners freed from Libyan jail
By Nic Robertson and Paul Cruickshank, CNN
“This is potentially a very dangerous development,” a former Libyan jihadist tells CNN
Moammar Gadhafi’s regime imprisoned thousands of suspected pro-al Qaeda militants
-Former members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) have assumed leadership positions in several rebel brigades, according to Benotman.
-The former leader of the LIFG, Abdullah al Sadeeq, now commands one of the most powerful rebel brigades in Tripoli, according to Benotman and, according to reports, took charge of successful rebel efforts earlier this week to storm Gadhafi’s Bab al-Aziziya compound…Sadeeq was a well-known figure in the jihadist movement. He fought the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan and helped found the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group there.
-In the east, where radicalization has historically run highest, young Salafi jihadists have linked up with foreign militants and may even have started their own training camps to train volunteers to fight the Gadhafi regime, according to Benotman. A number of jihadists, he says, have entered Libya from other Arab countries.
Tripoli, Libya: Hundreds of Islamist militants were among the prisoners freed from a…Tripoli prison this week, according to a former Libyan jihadist.
The freed militants had been imprisoned in Tripoli’s Abu Salim prison by Moammar Gadhafi’s regime during the height of the insurgency in Iraq, according to Noman Benotman, once a senior figure in the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group. Benotman said he believes as many as 600 militants may have been among the prison population at Abu Salim.
…
Benotman said many of the militants released are pro-al Qaeda.
“Nobody knows what these released prisoners are going to do next,” he said. “Will they take part in the fighting and if they do will they join pre-existing rebel brigades or form a separate fighting force?”
…
Gadhafi’s regime imprisoned thousands of suspected pro-al Qaeda militants after the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq stoked radicalization in Libya, especially in its impoverished eastern provinces. According to Benotman, those rounded up by the regime included militants who had tried to travel to Iraq and some who had returned from fighting against U.S. forces there…
Internal al Qaeda in Iraq records seized by the U.S. military in 2007 indicated that proportionately more Libyans traveled to fight with al Qaeda in Iraq than from any other Arab country…
Wednesday’s prison release, which occurred as rebel forces took control of the Abu Salim area of Tripoli, comes as Islamists are taking on an increasingly prominent role in the fight against the Gadhafi regime…
Former members of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) have assumed leadership positions in several rebel brigades, according to Benotman. Their current prominence, he said, was due to their quick mobilization – as armed opposition replaced peaceful protests in Libya – and their valued military skills.
The former leader of the LIFG, Abdullah al Sadeeq, now commands one of the most powerful rebel brigades in Tripoli, according to Benotman and, according to reports, took charge of successful rebel efforts earlier this week to storm Gadhafi’s Bab al-Aziziya compound, further bolstering his prominent position in rebel ranks.
Sadeeq was a well-known figure in the jihadist movement. He fought the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan and helped found the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group there. In the mid-1990s the LIFG conducted a deadly campaign of attacks on Libyan security services, before a crackdown largely constrained the group’s ability to operate inside the country. After the fall of the Taliban, Sadeeq fled Afghanistan to Iran and was eventually arrested in Hong Kong in 2004…
LIFG members and the younger generation of Salafi jihadists were often incarcerated in the same wing of Abu Salim prison. Benotman believes the presence of former LIFG commanders in rebel front lines will enhance their credibility amongst the released prisoners.
But he says some among the younger generation of jihadists have already begun operating outside the orbit of the NTC. In the east, where radicalization has historically run highest, young Salafi jihadists have linked up with foreign militants and may even have started their own training camps to train volunteers to fight the Gadhafi regime, according to Benotman. A number of jihadists, he says, have entered Libya from other Arab countries. In June, the NTC detained two suspected Jordanian jihadists in al-Brega in eastern Libya and expelled them, according to Benotman.
Neighboring Algeria, which waged a long battle against Islamist insurgents in the 1990s, has already expressed concern about the instability in Libya being exploited by al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and other jihadist groups. Algerian officials are also concerned that weapons such as ground-to-air missiles may have fallen into militant hands, a worry that has also been expressed by U.S. commanders.
====
NATO Special Forces Pave Way For Al-Qaeda, Somalia/Iraq-Type Black Hole
http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/08/27/55268402.html
Voice of Russia
August 27, 2011
Libya: contradictory recognition of new power
Boris Pavlishchev, Sergey Anisimov and Vladimir Fedoruk
-According to different reports, more than half of rebels who are now fighting against Gaddafi are members of Al Qaeda.
The League of Arab States has recognized Libya’s rebel Transitional National Council (TNС) as a legitimate representative of the Libyan people. At the same time the African Union says it won’t recognize TNC until the war is over in Libya and the new government including both supporters and opponents of Gaddafi is established.
…
Yuri Zinin, an expert in Oriental studies says that in the current situation he does not see any turning point back to reconciliation and stability.
“The opposition is not able to fill the political vacuum. In fact, we see a dual power in that country. No police in the streets, violence and looting in Tripoli. I fear that the country will be gripped by chaos like Iraq was. The spirit of guerrilla wars and regionalism keeps leaders of TNC from negotiating with each other. It is not a coincidence that the Council’s chairman threatened to resign if the situation does not change in the near future. That makes me fear for the future of Libya. According to different estimations, 2,000 to 5,000 people have been killed in this civil war and the bloodshed continues.”
It is too early to speak about the victory of the opposition, the head of the International institute of political expertise Evgeny Minchenko says.
“Considering the current chaos it looks more like Gaddafi’s victory. His location is still unknown but it is very likely he will be overthrown with the help of Western troops. The consequences will be catastrophic because if Gaddafi’s regime falls Libya will likely split into three parts and turn into a global black hole, something between Iraq and Somalia. Libya will pose a serious problem to the international stability.”
Evegeny Satanovsky, the president of the Institute of Middle East, shares this opinion but confirms it using different arguments.
“The most serious force in North Africa, in Sahara, today is Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and the “classic” Al Qaeda too. If Western troops enter Libya, thousands of mercenaries from Yemen, Morocco, Algeria, Afghanistan and Iraq will come to kill European and American soldiers. There is a scenario of turning Libya into a democratic state of a European type but this is very unlikely.”
Earlier this week in an interview with BBC a military expert Robert Fox admitted that Tripoli was attacked by special troops from Qatar and United Arab Emirates with the support of the US, Britain and France. The elder son of Gaddafi Mohamed also confirmed that foreign mercenaries and NATO troops took part in combat for the Libyan capital. Earlier Muammar Gaddafi said that mercenaries from Iraq and Egypt were fighting on the side of the rebels and some of them had been taken prisoners.
Meanwhile, the US, Britain and France have asked the countries neighboring Libya to strengthen their border controls to prevent the move out of Gaddafi’s money, gold and weapons abroad. Western powers fear that all these resource as well as toxic substances can be appropriated by Al Qaeda. According to different reports, more than half of rebels who are now fighting against Gaddafi are members of Al Qaeda.
====
Sanitized Slaughter: NATO Wages War But Avoids The Word
http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/08/26/nations-sanitize-libya-lingo-for-the-war-weary/
National Post
August 26, 2011
Nations sanitize Libya lingo for the war weary
Charles Lewis
-“Apparently killing people and destroying property on behalf of one side in a civil war does not rise to the level of war for the purposes of the Obama administration, at least…This is the first case I know of where we’ve taken full-scale military action where the president has avoided Congress.”
On March 19, a coalition of nations allied with rebel fighters in Libya to help drive Muammar Gaddafi from power. NATO forces, including Britain, France, Canada and the United States began with sorties, a naval blockade and the firing of deadly Tomahawk cruise missiles.
On that day, all became participants in a bloody fight, putting their military forces at risk and adding to the carnage already taking place on the ground.
Yet, with rare exception, their leaders did everything possible to avoid the word that made it clear what they had got themselves and their citizens into — a war.
They have reached for every euphemism possible — “military action,” “use of force,” “mission,” “operation,” “conflict,” “intervention” and “responsibility to protect” have all acted as stand-ins for “war.”
Even the use of “no-fly zone” sounded benign enough, with its implications of clearing the skies in the manner of air traffic controllers. But as Robert Gates, then-U.S. Secretary of Defense, said early in March, “Let’s just call a spade a spade. A no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defences.”
The term “humanitarian mission” was also often used — a term that could mean anything from food aid to dropping medical supplies to bombing.
“Apparently killing people and destroying property on behalf of one side in a civil war does not rise to the level of war for the purposes of the Obama administration, at least,” noted John Samples, a director at the Washington-based Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank.
Several days after NATO involvement began, he wrote, “War is commonly defined as ‘a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations.’ By that definition, the United States and its allies have been at war with Libya since late last week.”
The reasons for these kinds of obfuscations are complex, especially in the heated political climate of the United States. But several factors point to why Barack Obama, in particular, may have wanted to sanitize the risks of U.S. involvement.
After a decade of fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, polls show Americans are war weary and increasingly hostile to playing the role of the world’s policeman.
Two days after the start of U.S. involvement, Gallup found 47% of Americans approved of Mr. Obama’s actions, the lowest level of support for the 10 military actions the country has been involved in since 1983; 37% disapproved and 16% had no opinion.
By June 22, support had dropped to 39%, with 46% disapproval.
Meantime, the Pew Research Center found the United States experiencing the highest level of isolationist sentiment in more than half a century. In May, 46% of Americans said the United States should “mind its own business” internationally a 16-percentage-point increase from 2002.
…
David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, has also avoided any mention of war, stressing his country’s role is to enforce the UN Security Council resolution. Britons, too, have endured engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan. Polls showed tepid enthusiasm for action in Libya, dipping recently to a mere 31%.
Stephen Harper has been a rarity among Western leaders when it comes to using direct language. When the attacks began, he said the action being taken by Canada and other NATO forces amounted to an “act of war.”
The avoidance of the word war is not something new. For example, despite the United States losing close to 37,000 troops in Korea, U.S. schoolchildren were taught for years the proper term for what took place was “a police action,” not a war.
Mr. Samples said there is another reason why Mr. Obama may not want to call the Libyan action a war.
The U.S. Constitution says a president must go to Congress to declare war. This has not happened since 1941, when the United States declared war on the Axis powers, but the normal protocol has been for the president to at least get some form of Congressional approval.
“This is the first case I know of where we’ve taken full-scale military action where the president has avoided Congress,” Mr. Samples said.
…
Roger Sarty, a professor of military history at Wilfrid Laurier University, in Waterloo, Ont., believes the vagueness of language is something that developed in the late 1940s when the meaning of war implied the potential for total annihilation.
“In our modern age the distinction between war and peace has become a whole lot less clear,” he said.
Because of the nuclear threat, the idea of all-out war became too much to contemplate. Still, any military action can quickly slip into something much larger and politicians need to make that clear.
…
====
Reintegrated Into NATO, Frances Takes On Ivory Coast, Libya…Syria
http://euobserver.com/13/113408
EUobserver
August 26, 2011
Libya victory summit, warns Syria
By Andrew Rettman
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has called a high-level meeting on Libya’s post-Gaddafi future and promised support – but no military action – for opposition forces in Syria.
The event is to take place in Paris on 1 September – the 42nd anniversary of the coup which brought Colonel Gaddafi to power.
It is to be co-hosted by British Prime Minister David Cameron and to include rebel leaders Mahmoud Jibril and Abdel Jalil, delegates from the 28-country-strong anti-Gaddafi coalition, the Libya Contact Group, as well as states hostile to Western intervention in Libya – China, India, Russia and South Africa.
Speaking with Jibril in the French capital on Wednesday (24 August), Sarkozy said Gaddafi’s defeat has brought the Western and Arab worlds closer and that he was right to put France fully back into Nato in 2009.
…
“The reintegration of France into the principle organs of Nato did nothing to weaken French independnce – on the contrary, since France was, naturally, in the front lines during the military operations [in Libya].”
Sarkozy ruled out military intervention in Syria due to the lack of a UN mandate. But he warned President Bashar Assad to draw lessons from Libya and the Ivory Coast, where France also used force this year.
…”We now have precedents – the Ivory Coast and Libya. This is not to say we will get involved in more conflicts. But we will not give up on our principles. Syrian people have the right to freedom.”
…
The TNC has asked the UN to unfreeze $5 billion out of the $110 billion of Gaddafi assets reportedly held in banks round the world. The US has so far drafted a UN text allowing for the unfreezing of $1.5 billion, with a vote at the UN Security Council expected by the weekend.
With Gaddafi still at large, Sarkozy pledged to keep up military support for the TNC…
Nato spokeswoman Oana Lugnescu told the AP news agency on Wednesday that an options paper for a potential joint UN-Nato mission will come up for discussion next week.
“The council provided Nato military authorities with a set of political guidelines for a possible future Nato supporting role in Libya … in support of wider international efforts,” she said, referring to the North Atlantic Council, the alliance’s political governing body.
====
Lesson Of Libyan War: Completely Capitulate As Soon As Possible Or Develop Sophisticated Weapons
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90780/7580138.html
People’s Daily
August 25, 2011
Reflect on negative effects of Libya war
-The war seems to be a conflict between Libyan rebels and the governmental forces but is actually manipulated by the Western powers. Without NATO’s large-scale, long-lasting air strike, the war would not have lasted more than five months.
-The war has sent a strong signal to anti-West state leaders: once they become the enemies of the West, they should either completely capitulate as soon as possible, or develop sophisticated weapons to ensure their own safety.
The civil war in Libya will come to an end now that the opposition forces have entered into Libya’s capital Tripoli. However, the five-month regional war will pose a long-term impact on the situation in West Asia and North Africa.
…
The unexpected civil war cannot just be viewed as the democratic fight against tyranny and the suppression of freedom but a resistance against the unfair distribution of political and economic interests within the context of a “tribal war.” Tribal wars are characterized by their winner-take-all nature. As the opposition forces have incited deep hatred of Qaddafi’s tribes during the war, whether or not they can properly treat the pro-Qaddafi tribes after coming into power is still unknown. Some Western countries that have participated in the military operations against Qaddafi have also shown their concerns.
The end of the war does not necessarily mean that Libya will enter into a new era of democracy and freedom. Afterward, the country will face a very difficult test of how to avoid tribal retaliations and internal rivalries among opposition forces. Furthermore, issues such as restoring the infrastructure damaged by the war and dealing with the increasing number of refugees cannot be addressed without strong external support. History never repeats itself in a linear way, and it is still uncertain what is next in Libya’s next round of political changes.
The Libyan war forcibly changed many factors influencing the situation in West Asia and North Africa. The turmoil in West Asia and North Africa at the beginning of this year was mainly caused by internal factors: people there seek democracy and improvement of people’s livelihood as well as oppose dictatorship and unfair distribution.
The war cannot fully meet the demands of the Libyan people with Western interference, and the opposition is nothing more than a bargaining chip picked up by the Western countries to achieve their own strategic goals. For a considerably long period of time, NATO has had no idea of the constitution and political views of the rebels that they support, which did not stop NATO providing various kinds of assistances for the war-torn country. The external causes of the Libyan war have made the instability in West Asia and North Africa even more complicated.
The spillover effect of this war is more negative than positive. The proper operation of the international community needs all countries to abide by basic game rules, and the bottom-line rule refers to basic norms of international law. The Libyan war started under the banner of U.N. Resolution 1973, but whether NATO’s air strike has exceeded the power granted by the resolution has long been questioned by all parties. The war seems to be a conflict between Libyan rebels and the governmental forces but is actually manipulated by the Western powers. Without NATO’s large-scale, long-lasting air strike, the war would not have lasted more than five months.
Gaddafi gave up his weapons of mass destruction program and surrendered to the West in political and economic areas in 2003, but Libya still suffered military attacks from Western countries. Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei recently said publicly that it has proved to be a right decision for Iran not to abandon its nuclear program.
Russia’s Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has also said publicly that the Libya war shows it is absolutely necessary for Russia to build up its military forces and to enhance national security. The two leaders’ remarks have shown the negative effects of the war in Libya. The war has sent a strong signal to anti-West state leaders: once they become the enemies of the West, they should either completely capitulate as soon as possible, or develop sophisticated weapons to ensure their own safety. As more and more anti-West leaders preferring to the latter choice, the world is facing larger risk of re-entering a “political jungle.”
All parties involved should draw a lesson from the negative outcome of the Libya war. According to media reports, NATO is using the term “catastrophic success” to describe the victory against the Qaddafi regime. It would be much better to avoid the war than to achieve such “catastrophic success.”
Greater attention should have been paid to the political solution and other peaceful means that certain countries had suggested before and during the Libya crisis. Although history cannot be rewritten, a rethink is definitely necessary because it can prevent some Western countries from making the same mistakes when similar tough issues arise.
====
Pentagon’s Horn Of Africa Task Force Hosts 11-Nation Gathering
http://www.africom.mil/getArticle.asp?art=7117&lang=0
U.S. Africa Command
August 26, 2011
Building Esprit de Corps – CJTF-HOA Hosts Senior NCO Symposium
By U.S. Air Force Senior Airman Jarad A. Denton
CJTF-HOA Public Affairs
CAMP LEMONNIER, Djibouti: For the first time in its nine-year history, the Combined Joint Task Force – Horn of Africa hosted a senior enlisted conference, August 22 to 24, 2011, bringing together service members from 11 countries, spanning four continents, to enhance regional and international partnerships…
The CJTF-HOA 2011 Senior Non-Commissioned Symposium hosted representatives from Djibouti, Rwanda, Japan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Spain, Seychelles, Mauritius, Burundi, Uganda and the United States…
…
In addition to a familiarization with the mission and processes of CJTF-HOA, the conference focused on the importance of a unified military presence in the Horn of Africa.
…
With roughly 30,000 cargo ships and 11 percent of the world’s oil passing through the waters off the Horn of Africa every year, an increase in piracy has become a primary concern for the region’s military forces, said Mykoo.
…
Mykoo said CJTF-HOA is branching out into the region with a whole of government approach, utilizing the 3-D process, which is diplomacy, development and defense.
The goal is to create a unity among partner nations before strategic decisions are made by higher leadership. This is designed to foster collaboration, coordination and cooperation…
U.S. Army Sergeant Major Samuel Metzger, U.S. Africa Command East Africa Regional Engagements senior enlisted leader, said the discussions and questions raised during this symposium will serve to strengthen ties between enlisted service members, their commanders and partners from other nations.
…
====
Britain Boosts Military Ties With Azerbaijan Versus Armenia, Iran
http://www.news.az/articles/politics/43022
AzerTAc
August 23, 2011
Azerbaijan, Great Britain boost military cooperation
It is time to sign an agreement on military cooperation, the Assistant Chief of the Defense Staff of Great Britain says.
Azerbaijan`s defence minister, colonel-general Safar Abiyev, met Mr. Graham Howard, Air Vice Marshall, Assistant Chief of the Defense Staff (Logistic Operations) of Great Britain.
Mr. Abiyev briefed the guest on the military-political situation in the Southern Caucasus and the 20-year occupation of Azerbaijani lands by Armenia. He said talks carried out by the OSCE Minsk group didn`t yield any results and four resolutions of UN Security Council were not fulfilled.
Boosting cooperation in military sphere was also discussed at the meeting. Mr. Howard said it is time to sign an agreement on military cooperation.
====
Canada Expands Military Role In Arctic For Local, Global Missions
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/canada-in-afghanistan/military+gone+north/5297447/story.html
Ottawa Citizen
August 24, 2011
Why the military has gone north
By Peter McKenna*
-Canada’s elite Special Operations Regiment…were engaging in specialized expeditionary training with their own equipment – testing their performance capability in austere conditions and rugged terrain (where it could come in handy in other parts of the world).
-[T]he senior military leadership views the Arctic (especially in a post-Afghanistan milieu) as a means of further justifying its reason for being…This is critical because it allows the military to make the case to political masters that the defence budget should be insulated from any deep cuts in the rush to balance the federal books….[T]he Canadian military is perfectly content to play around in the Arctic just as long as the money taps stay open and they can utilize their training there for other “hot spots” around the world.
Having just returned from Operation Nanook 11 – which involves roughly 1,100 Canadian Forces personnel from the navy, air force, army and even special forces in Resolute Bay, Nunavut – as an invited observer, it’s not hard to tell that both the Canadian government and the military are preparing for a larger presence in the North…
Canada’s elite Special Operations Regiment (probably a handful or so) in their tan berets could be spotted around the Resolute camp. Since they were basically operating on their own, not much was said about what exactly they were doing there. We were told that they were engaging in specialized expeditionary training with their own equipment – testing their performance capability in austere conditions and rugged terrain (where it could come in handy in other parts of the world).
While we didn’t actually observe the unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in action, a Gagetown, N.B., regiment was gearing them up (five U.S.-manufactured ScanEagles and one nighttime version) for their first-time deployment in the windy North…
The UAVs (at a cost of roughly $200,000 each) were going to be used as part of the larger operation’s search and rescue simulation – feeding back video images of the mock disaster scene. But their chief functions or missions involve surveilling convoy and troop movements, detecting improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and observing harbours (looking for fuel re-supply).
This raises an obvious question: Why is there this burgeoning military presence in Canada’s High Arctic – especially since, unofficially at least, many in the military dread a posting to the North?
Yes, there is the whole sovereignty question and symbolism, nationalistic Canadian sentiments about the Arctic and its domestic political import for federal politicians. Of course, it is also important to be sending out the right signals to our Arctic neighbours like the Americans, the Danes, the Norwegians and the Russians.
More significant, one could argue that the senior military leadership views the Arctic (especially in a post-Afghanistan milieu) as a means of further justifying its reason for being. Stated differently, it gives them a mission priority that has the firm backing of the Conservative government in Ottawa.
This is critical because it allows the military to make the case to political masters that the defence budget should be insulated from any deep cuts in the rush to balance the federal books. If anything, they will argue that military resources should be bolstered if the Harperites want the Canadian Forces to be meaningfully engaged in the Arctic, properly equipped for northern conditions, and operationally/strategically robust.
Indeed, the one thing that the Department of National Defence does not want to see happen is additional resources going to the Coast Guard instead of them. It would be better for the military to wrap itself in an Arctic mission (and to secure the requisite procurement) rather than have the Coast Guard squeeze out more money for sovereignty patrols, scientific investigation and a polarclass icebreaker.
In short, the Canadian military is perfectly content to play around in the Arctic just as long as the money taps stay open and they can utilize their training there for other “hot spots” around the world. And if this is the case, you can look for the CF. to deepen its military footprint in the Arctic going forward.
*Peter McKenna is professor of political studies at the University of Prince Edward Island in Charlottetown.
====
NATO Rejects Presidential Election In Abkhazia
http://en.rian.ru/world/20110827/166230076.html
Russian Information Agency Novosti
August 27, 2011
NATO refuses to recognize presidential elections in Abkhazia
BRUSSELS: NATO has refused to recognize presidential elections in Abkhazia, NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Saturday.
Presidential elections held on August 26 in Abkhazia, which NATO refuses to recognize as an independent state and considers it part of Georgia, were won by Alexander Ankvab, who received 54.86% of votes.
“The holding of such elections does not contribute to a peaceful and lasting settlement of the situation in Georgia,” Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a statement.
“The alliance reiterates its full support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia within its internationally recognized borders,” he added.
====
