Remembering NATO's murder of Libya
In this way, the African State was demolished. As the World Bank documented in 2010, it maintained “high levels of economic growth” with an increase in GDP of 7.5% per year, and recorded “high indicators of human development” including universal access to primary and secondary education schools and, over 40%, to university education. Despite the disparities, the average standard of living in Libya was higher than in other African countries. About two million immigrants, mostly Africans, found work there. The Libyan State, which possessed the largest oil reserves in Africa plus other natural gas reserves, left limited profit margins to foreign companies. Thanks to energy exports, the Libyan trade balance was in surplus of 27 billion dollars a year. With these resources, the Libyan State had invested about 150 billion dollars abroad. Libyan investments in Africa were crucial to the African Union’s plan to create three financial organizations: the African Monetary Fund, based in Yaoundé (Cameroon); the African Central Bank, based in Abuja (Nigeria); the African Investment Bank, based in Tripoli. These bodies would serve to create a common market and a single currency for Africa.
It is no coincidence that NATO’s war for the demolition of the Libyan State began less than two months after the African Union Summit, on January 31, 2011, which started the creation of the African Monetary Fund to be realized within the year. This is proven by emails from the Obama administration’s Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, brought to light later by WikiLeaks: United States and France wanted to eliminate Gaddafi before he used Libya’s gold reserves to create a pan-African currency, alternative to the dollar and the CFA franc (currency imposed by France on its 14 former colonies). This is proven by the fact that, before the bombers went into action in 2011, the banks went into action: they seized the 150 billion dollars invested abroad by the Libyan State, most of which disappeared. In the great robbery, Goldman Sachs, the most powerful US investment bank of which Mario Draghi had been vice president, stood out.
Today, the revenues from energy exports in Libya are being captured by power groups and multinationals in a chaotic situation of armed clashes. The living standard of the majority of the population has collapsed. African immigrants, accused of being “Gaddafi’s mercenaries,” were even imprisoned in zoo cages, tortured, and murdered. Libya has become the main transit route of a chaotic migratory flow to Europe in the hands of human traffickers that has caused many more victims than the 2011 war. In Tawergha the Misrata Islamic militias supported by NATO (those who assassinated Gaddafi in October 2011) carried out a true ethnic cleansing, forcing almost 50,000 Libyan citizens to flee without being able to return. The Italian Parliament, who was also responsible for all this, on March 18, 2011, committed the Government to “take every initiative (ie Italy’s entry into the war against Libya) to ensure the protection of the populations in the region.”
This article was originally published in Italian on Il Manifesto.
Manlio Dinucci is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
UN silent despite no grounds for NATO war on Libya
Posted on 11 October 2011
By Frances Thomas, 10 October 2011, Source: scoop.co.nz
(This article was first removed from the source site and reappeared slightly edited a day after its first publication.)
The situation in Sirte is dire. Six weeks under siege after months of aerial attacks. Children and old people dead of hunger and thirst. Water supply hit. Hospitals without medical supplies to treat the ill and injured, and then bombed by NATO. The dead lying in the streets. Constant ‘targeted’ nightly aerial bombardment by NATO air forces. Constant ‘fire at will’ daytime attacks from ill-disciplined NTC rebels using tanks, rockets, mortars and howitzers.
In their missile-launcher-laden graffiti-decorated pick-up trucks, the rebels drive into the city edges in the morn and back out by dark, hailed as ‘freedom-fighters’ by their embedded foreign press, they more resemble armed gangs. Some are Libyan, dissatisfied with policies of their current government. A few have returned after a generation abroad with historical tribal differences to settle. Others are LIFG veterans wanting to set up a strict Islamic fundamentalism. Qatari forces, UK SAS and CIA are known to have been on the ground in Libya. The battle-hardened are Al Qaeda and mercenaries on the pay-roll of interested parties, who follow where wars lead them, so long as they are paid well to kill, and have licence to loot and rape.
How did this modern-day barbarianism ever come to be?
The specific phrases in UNSC resolution #1973, which NATO nations say permit them to conduct and support this military action in Libya, are “no-fly zone”, “all necessary measures” and “to protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack.”
That’s it. Just a few words. Innocuous enough until NATO got their hands on them and twisted them beyond recognition.
The distortion of those few words’ intended meaning was almost certainly a factor in the veto by Russia and China of the recent resolution against Syria. NATO’s actions in Libya are clearly seen to violate UNSC resolution #1973, and some member states are wary.
Oh, and the evidence that Libyan people needed protecting from imminent danger of their own government firing on them?
Remembering that this pre-emptive NATO action was to “stop Gaddafi from launching a massacre of his own people.”
No evidence was ever produced.
On 1 March, two weeks after the accusations, when asked if he had seen any evidence that Gaddafi intended to fire on citizens, then US Sec of Defense Robert Gates said, “We’ve seen the press reports but we have no confirmation.” And US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen added, “That’s right. We’ve seen no confirmation whatsoever.”
So NATO attacked Libya on the basis of a press report.
Gates had some sense of what was right because he also stated that “the UN Security Council resolution provides no authorisation for the use of armed force.” Gates would be gone by June, replaced by ex-CIA director Leon Panetta.
On 31 March, as NATO strikes in support of the rebels began, more questions were asked of Gates and Mullen by the US Senate Armed Services Committee. “Was al Qaeda involved in Libya?” Mullen answered, “We haven’t seen anything, other than aspirational, from al Qaeda leadership.” Gates said that Gaddafi was “trying to ‘gen’ up the narrative that the opposition is in fact led by al Qaeda.”
When asked “Do either one of you believe that the Libyan people would stand for an al Qaeda-led Libya?” “Absolutely no evidence to support that,” said Gates, and Mullen, “No, I don’t.”
Gates, in explanation, added that “the real power in Libya is in the hands of these tribes, and even Gaddafi realises that, and I just don’t understand how it would be possible for these tribes to want to cede any of that authority to some outside crowd like al Qaeda.”
Interesting. Here we have US Sec of Defense Gates supporting what Gaddafi, rather than merely ‘realising’, has always strongly stated. Which is that in Libya the real power is in the hands of the Libyan people, in the hands of the tribes.
This fact conflicts with the ‘Gaddafi as dictator’ storyline. It seems the journalists from US, UK, France, and Qatar, who were in Tripoli until August, had read the Obama/Clinton script, rather than US Senate committee transcript. All year the foreign press have chosen to ignore the fact that the tribal peoples of Libya – what did Gates say? – “hold the real power in Libya,” and instead used any means to bolster their ‘Gaddafi as dictator’ narrative, and have thus distorted the news that has beamed into our living rooms since February. News that has formed the opinion of millions, deprived them of the truth, and so delayed the groundswell of dissent against NATO’s war on Libya.
And about al Qaeda. Gaddafi had said from the beginning that the rebels were al Qaeda led. Gates and Mullen dismissed that in March, though in vague terms.
It’s become apparent in recent months that Gaddafi was telling the truth again. More camera-shy than the youthful rebels, the al Qaeda contingent is nevertheless a huge presence. They are led by Abdel Hakim Belhadj, an al Qaeda affiliate and Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) leader who had “close relationships” and trained with al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The LIFG is still included on both UK and US lists of terrorist organisations. Belhadj is now the NTC’s new official chief military commander.
Rehabilitated in the western press and approved by NATO though Belhadj may be, Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen got one more thing right. The Libyan people don’t want a bar of anyone associated with al Qaeda leading them in any capacity. Nor do they trust Belhadj’s LIFG background. Libya is 97 per cent Islamic, and though other religions are allowed to practise freely (though not proselytize), one group not tolerated by law in Libya is militant Islamic fundamentalism.
For months now buried in the official records, Gates and Mullen’s take on Libya is, well, just not politically correct. Despite the evidence of ‘mission creep’, NATO leaders seem determined to bet against a future Nuremberg-style war crime action against them, and continue to pound the city of Sirte by night, to ‘break the ground’ for their daytime sniper-fodder ‘relief team.’
During a two day so-called truce in early October the Red Cross tried to enter Sirte to provide humanitarian aid. On the first day they managed to visit a hospital on the southern outskirts, bringing in a few needed supplies, but the hospital came under NTC rebel attack, and they were not able to inspect the whole building let alone get into the city proper and visit other areas.
On the second day the Red Cross tried to take two large aid trucks into the city. But the rebels began firing and so the Red Cross backed up quickly and abandoned their attempt. Preventing access for aid, another war crime.
Forever announcing their ‘final’ assault on Sirte, the NTC rebels have not yet quite managed to achieve it. NATO is now firing missiles from helicopters onto the city. They continue their murderous siege of 135,000 people, maybe more people because many from other towns months ago sought harbour in Sirte, maybe fewer because many have died or fled. Whatever the number, the people of Sirte are defending themselves and their city against NATO’s military might.
The United Nations community is being tested. On whether the international member nations have the moral courage to stand up to the powerful NATO nations, point out the illegality of the war on Libya, and insist that their ambassadors take that message to the UN. Meanwhile Gaddafi is proven right yet again, when he observed years ago that the UN did not provide fair treatment for its smaller and less powerful member nations. On this matter, I’d rather he could be proved wrong.
^3000US citizens have no real political representation.
We don't live in a democracy. And our freedom is disappearing fast.
I don't want to be ruled by hypocrites, whores, and war criminals.
What about you? Time to push back against the corporate oligarchy.
And its multitude of minions and lackeys.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post
YOU ARE FREE TO REPRODUCE THIS ARTICLE PROVIDED YOU GIVE PROPER CREDIT TO THE GREANVILLE POST
VIA A BACK LIVE LINK.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License